Citation Nr: 21065523 Decision Date: 10/26/21 Archive Date: 10/26/21 DOCKET NO. 14-99 821A DATE: October 26, 2021 REMANDED Restoration of the 70 percent rating for diabetic retinopathy effective November 6, 2015, due to clear and unmistakable error (CUE) in a February 18, 2016, rating decision is remanded. An effective date earlier than November 6, 2015, for grant of service connection for diabetic retinopathy is remanded. A rating higher than 20 percent for diabetes mellitus type II with erectile dysfunction is remanded. A compensable rating for diabetic retinopathy is remanded. An initial rating higher than 10 percent for peripheral neuropathy of the right upper extremity prior to November 3, 2015, is remanded. A rating higher than 30 percent for peripheral neuropathy of the right upper extremity as of November 3, 2015, is remanded. An initial rating higher than 20 percent for peripheral neuropathy of the left upper extremity is remanded. An initial rating higher than 10 percent for peripheral neuropathy of the right lower extremity, prior to November 7, 2013, is remanded. An initial rating higher than 20 percent for peripheral neuropathy of the right lower extremity, as of November 7, 2013, is remanded. An initial rating higher than 20 percent for peripheral neuropathy of the left lower extremity is remanded. A total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities (TDIU) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from August 1969 to April 1976. He died in May 2016. The appellant is his surviving spouse. She has been substituted for the Veteran to process his pending appeals to completion. See 38 U.S.C. § 5121A; 38 C.F.R. § 3.1010. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from October 2013 and February 2016 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The appellant testified at a video conference hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in January 2021. A transcript of the hearing is associated with the claims file. In March 2021, the Board remanded this case for further development. 1. Restoration of the 70 percent rating for diabetic retinopathy is remanded. 2. An effective date earlier than November 6, 2015, for grant of service connection for diabetic retinopathy is remanded. 3. A rating higher than 20 percent for diabetes mellitus type II with erectile dysfunction is remanded. 4. A compensable rating for diabetic retinopathy is remanded. 5. An initial rating higher than 10 percent for peripheral neuropathy of the right upper extremity prior to November 3, 2015, is remanded. 6. A rating higher than 30 percent for peripheral neuropathy of the right upper extremity as of November 3, 2015, is remanded. 7. An initial rating higher than 20 percent for peripheral neuropathy of the left upper extremity is remanded. 8. An initial rating higher than 10 percent for peripheral neuropathy of the right lower extremity, prior to November 7, 2013, is remanded. 9. An initial rating higher than 20 percent for peripheral neuropathy of the right lower extremity, as of November 7, 2013, is remanded. 10. An initial rating higher than 20 percent for peripheral neuropathy of the left lower extremity is remanded. 11. TDIU is remanded. In August 2021, the appellant's attorney requested a hearing before a decision review officer (DRO). As the AOJ schedules DRO hearings, a remand is warranted. (Continued on the next page) The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Schedule the appellant for a DRO hearing in connection with the appealed issues subject to this remand. The appellant and her private attorney should be notified of the date, time, and location of this hearing. A copy of that notification letter should also be placed in the Veteran's file. Any attempts to accommodate the appellant's hearing request should be documented in the record. M. HYLAND Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board B. Houbeck 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.