Citation Nr: 21073592 Decision Date: 12/09/21 Archive Date: 12/09/21 DOCKET NO. 16-30 366 DATE: December 9, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a compensable evaluation for service-connected eczema is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for left carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for right CTS is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served active duty from September 1974 to November 1994. This case comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal of a September 2014 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). A September 2019 Board decision previously remanded this matter because the Veteran had not been provided an examination for CTS, and his examination for eczema had grown stale. See September 2019 Board Remand, pgs. 9-10. Thus, the remand directives were so that the Veteran could receive the required VA examinations to develop his claims. For reasons discussed below, the Board will again remand the matters, despite substantial compliance with remand instructions. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998); see also Dyment v. West, 13 Vet. App. 141, 146-47 (1999). On remand, a January 9, 2020 Exam Scheduling Request was associated with the claims file for the required examinations. See January 9, 2020 Exam Scheduling Request. However, on January 10, 2020 the examination request was cancelled with a notation: "unable to contact Veteran." See Correspondence, Exam Details, received February 12, 2020. Consequently, the RO issued an August 2020 Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC) denying the claims due to inadequate medical evidence to substantiate the claims. However, the Board finds that the record is unclear as to whether examinations were actually scheduled, or whether notice was correctly provided. It appears they may not have been scheduled because VA could not reach the Veteran by phone. While the Board is remanding this matter to permit the Veteran another VA examination, the Veteran should understand that the VA's duty to assist is not always a one-way street. Wood v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 190, 193 (1991). Rather, the Veteran must cooperate in obtaining the evidence necessary to adjudicate these claims, including keeping his contact information up-to-date and attending VA exams. See, e.g., 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.159(c) (requiring claimant to "cooperate fully with VA's efforts" to obtain both VA and non-VA medical records) and 3.655(b) (setting forth potential consequences when a veteran fails to appear for a scheduled examination). The Veteran should be aware that a failure to appear at a scheduled examination without good cause may result in his claims being decided based on the available medical evidence or, if appropriate, denied. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.655(b). Accordingly, affording the Veteran the benefit of the doubt, the Board is unable to presume that the Veteran was properly notified of the upcoming examinations to permit any application of 38 C.F.R. § 3.655(b). See Kyhn v. Shinseki, 716 F.3d 572 (Fed. Cir. 2013). As such, the Board finds that the Veteran should be afforded an additional opportunity to undergo VA examinations in connection with his appeal. The RO should schedule the Veteran for the appropriate VA examinations, should make appropriate efforts to contact the Veteran and make appropriate efforts to confirm the appointments with the Veteran. Such efforts should be documented and associated with the claims file which should include the consequences of failure to report for a VA examination without good cause. The Veteran is hereby notified that it is his responsibility to report for scheduled examinations and to cooperate in the development of the claims. If the Veteran does not report for the scheduled examination, documentation must be obtained to show that notices scheduling the examinations was sent to his most recent mailing address of record and whether any notice sent was returned as undeliverable. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the current severity of his eczema. The VA examiner must review the complete claims file and must note that review in the report. 2. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of his left and right CTS. The examiner should provide an opinion on the following: (a) Whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e., a 50 percent or greater probability) his left CTS had its onset during service or is otherwise related to service. (b) Whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e., a 50 percent or greater probability) his right CTS had its onset during service or is otherwise related to service (Continued on the next page) The examiner should cite to the pertinent medical and competent lay evidence of record and explain the rationale for all opinions given. If after consideration of all pertinent factors it remains that the opinion sought cannot be given without resort to speculation, it should be so stated, and the provider must (to comply with governing legal guidelines) explain why the opinion sought cannot be offered without resort to speculation. All necessary tests, studies and clinical findings should be reported in detail KRISTI L. GUNN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board K. McKenzie, Associate 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.