Citation Nr: 20028058 Decision Date: 04/22/20 Archive Date: 04/22/20 DOCKET NO. 190124-4225 DATE: April 22, 2020 REMANDED Service connection for bilateral foot disability, to include as due to exposure to Agent Orange, is remanded. Service connection for bilateral hip disability, to include as due to exposure to Agent Orange, is remanded. Service connection for bilateral ankle disability, to include as due to exposure to Agent Orange, is remanded. Service connection for lumbar spine disability, to include as due to exposure to Agent Orange, is remanded. Service connection for skin disability, to include as due to exposure to Agent Orange, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Army from May 1968 to December 1969. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) with the appeal of a February 2015 rating decision by a Regional Office (RO) of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), which denied the service connection issues and entitlement to a total disability rating due to individual unemployability (TDIU). The Veteran perfected an appeal in the traditional manner, and these issues were remanded by the Board in February 2018. In August 2018, the Veteran opted to take part in the Rapid Appeals Modernization Program (RAMP). He withdrew the pending legacy appeal and selected the higher-level review option. The November 2018 RAMP rating decision considered the evidence of record as of the date of the August 2018 election. The decision adjudicated the issues of service connection for bilateral osteoarthritis of the feet, hips and ankles, lumbar spine myositis, and atopic dermatitis. A RAMP decision on the issue of entitlement to TDIU has not yet been rendered and the Board does not have jurisdiction over this issue at this time. In July 2019, the Board denied the matters on appeal. The Veteran appealed the Board’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In February 2020, the Court granted the parties’ motion for a joint motion for remand (JMR) and the case has been returned to the Board for review. In the February 2020 JMR, the parties determined that the Board provided an inadequate statement of reasons or bases for its decision. The parties explained that the Board erred by not discussing whether the duty to assist required VA to obtain the VA medical examinations ordered by the Board’s February 2018 remand as such examinations were ordered prior to the Veteran’s August 2018 RAMP opt-in election. Here, the Board finds that remand is warranted. Though the Veteran withdrew the matters on appeal from the legacy system following the Board’s February 2018 remand, such an action does not obviate the development that was ordered by the Board’s February 2018 remand. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998) (a remand from the Court or the Board confers on the claimant, as a matter of law, the right to VA compliance with the terms of the remand orders). Accordingly, updated VA treatment records and VA examinations must be obtained. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain updated VA treatment records. 2. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of the claimed skin disability. The claims file must be made available for review. The examiner must provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not that any skin disability is related to service, to include Agent Orange exposure. The examiner must address the January 2014 private opinion and provide rationale for any opinion reached. 3. Schedule the Veteran for VA examinations to determine the nature and etiology of the claimed lumbar spine, bilateral hip, bilateral ankle, and bilateral foot disabilities. The claims file must be made available for review. The examiner should provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not that any lumbar spine, bilateral hip, bilateral ankle, or bilateral foot disorder is related to service. The examiner must address the January 2014 private opinion and provide rationale for any opinion reached. WILLIAM H. DONNELLY Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Seay, Counsel The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.