Citation Nr: 20042743 Decision Date: 06/24/20 Archive Date: 06/24/20 DOCKET NO. 15-28 533 DATE: June 24, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 70 percent for service-connected schizophrenia is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from January 2003 to October 2006. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2015 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In April 2016, November 2017, and February 2020, the Board remanded the case to the RO for additional development In November 2017, the Board remanded the Veteran’s claim because there was confusion as to whether the Veteran received proper notice for a required VA examination. The Board directed the Veteran again be provided a VA examination regarding the severity of his schizophrenia and that a copy of the notice letter of the date and time of the examination should be included in the claims file. In November 2017, the RO scheduled a VA examination for the Veteran, but in December 2017 and January 2018 the Veteran phoned the RO. He reported that he was under a court order to remain in Jacksonville and could not report for an examination in Gainesville. He requested an examination in Jacksonville. It appears that the Veteran was rescheduled for an examination in January 2018. The file contains the text of a letter telling the Veteran he failed to report for this examination, but not a copy of any letter advising him of the date, time, and location of the VA examination. Instead, there are only notes indicating such a letter had been sent. Accordingly, the Board remanded the matter again in February 2020 directing the RO send the Veteran a letter requesting the Veteran to submit any updated medical treatment records and to provide the Veteran for a VA examination in Jacksonville, Florida, to determine the current symptoms, level of severity, and functional impairment associated with his schizophrenia. Furthermore, a copy of any notification letter(s) informing the Veteran of the date, time, and location of his examination must be included in the claims file. If the VA examination cannot occur in Jacksonville, the letter needed to advise the Veteran of this fact so that he had the opportunity to request permission from the Court to travel to the location of the examination. With apologies to the Veteran, this matter must once again be remanded because of the RO’s failure to follow the Board’s directives. A previous remand confers on the claimant, as a matter of law, the right to compliance with the remand orders. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). The record demonstrates that a VA examination was apparently scheduled in March 2020, but the Veteran did not report for the examination. The documentation, however, does not indicate whether the VA examination was scheduled in Jacksonville, Florida as directed. There also is no letter or copy of the notification to the Veteran of the date, time, and location of the VA examination and if the examination could not be scheduled in Jacksonville, Florida, advising the Veteran that a Jacksonville, Florida, VA examination cannot be arranged. Accordingly, once again, the Board must remand this matter to the RO to provide a VA examination to the Veteran and must fully document the time, date, and location of the VA examination. The RO must include the letter or notice to the Veteran informing him about the VA examination and if the VA examination cannot occur in Jacksonville, the letter must advise the Veteran of this fact and suggest he seek permission from the Court to travel to the location of the examination. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Ask the Veteran to identify all outstanding treatment records relevant to his schizophrenia claim. All identified VA records should be added to the claims file. All other properly identified records should be obtained if the necessary authorization to obtain the records is provided by the Veteran. If any records are not available, or the Veteran identifies sources of treatment but does not provide authorization to obtain records, appropriate action should be taken (see 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)-(e)), to include notifying the Veteran of the unavailability of the records. 2. After records development is completed, schedule the Veteran for a VA mental health examination to determine the current symptoms, level of severity, and functional impairment associated with his schizophrenia. The RO should schedule the Veteran for a VA examination in Jacksonville, Florida. If an examination cannot be scheduled at a location in Jacksonville, Florida to which the Veteran can travel as permitted by the Court, or safely travel, or if health considerations make the scheduling of an in-person examination not possible, the RO should consider whether other virtual options, to include telehealth interviews or examinations are possible. If virtual alternatives are not feasible or possible, the RO should indicate as much, and medical opinions based on review of the Veteran’s claims file should be obtained, in lieu of an in-person or virtual examination, addressing the etiology of the Veteran’s claimed disabilities. The claims file should be reviewed by the examiner. If the Veteran exhibits feigning/exaggerating symptoms or is uncooperative, the VA examiner should detail in what ways the Veteran simulated or exaggerated his symptoms or was uncooperative. 3. A copy of any notification letter(s) informing the Veteran of the date, time, and location of his examination must be included in the claims file. If the VA examination cannot occur in Jacksonville, the letter must advise the Veteran of this fact so that he can seek permission to travel to the location of the examination C.B. Iwanowski Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Russell P. Veldenz, 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.