Citation Nr: 21074363 Decision Date: 12/15/21 Archive Date: 12/15/21 DOCKET NO. 17-13 341 DATE: December 15, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a compensable disability rating for dry skin of the hands is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for scars is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a skin condition other than dry skin of the hands, to include seborrheic dermatitis, basal cell carcinoma, or skin rash is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from November 1977 to May 1992. This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal of a June 2015 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The appeal was previously before the Board in February 2019, and again in January 2020. On each occasion, the Board remanded the appeal for further development. In March 2020, the RO issued a supplemental statement of the case. The appeal has now returned to the Board further appellate review. In order to fully consider the Veteran's claim, the issue of entitlement to service connection for a skin condition has been recharacterized as set forth above. See Clemons v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 1 (2009). 1. Entitlement to a compensable disability rating for dry skin on hands is remanded. 2. Entitlement to service connection for scars is remanded. 3. Entitlement to service connection for a skin condition other than dry skin on hands, to include seborrheic dermatitis, basal cell carcinoma, or skin rash is remanded. The Veteran contends that the dry hands skin condition has worsened, and he is entitled to a compensable rating. The Veteran also maintains that his skin condition and scars should be service connected because he has had chronic skin problems since military service that have continued since that time and resulted in scars. He also contends that the March 2020 VA examination for his skin and scars did not consider important information rendering the opinions inadequate. New evidence was introduced into the record following the March 2020 supplement statement of the case consisting of various medical records and an August 2020 VA skin examination. The new VA medical evidence is relevant to the Veteran's claims. However, there is no updated supplemental statement of the case in the record indicating that the issues on appeal were readjudicated in light of that new evidence, nor is there a waiver of agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) review from the Veteran or his representative. The most recent adjudication of the record was the supplemental statement of the case issued in March 2020. The Board sent a letter in October 2021 requesting waiver of AOJ review, but no response was received within 45 days. Therefore, the Board must assume that the Veteran does not wish to have the Board decide his appeal at this time and remand is required for AOJ review. The March 2020 examiner noted that the Veteran's basal cell carcinoma was less likely than not incurred in or caused by the claimed in-service injury, event, or illness. The examiner noted that the Veteran grew up during childhood and also service in the military in warm southern states. The examiner concluded that childhood sun exposure appears to be more important than exposure during adult life. Evidence supporting this hypothesis comes from case control studies and clinical trial. However, the Veteran reported in an August 2020 correspondence that the examiner did not ask him questions about his outside activities or exposure to the sun during his childhood. In light of the Veteran's contention that the March 2020 VA skin and scars examination was not adequate, as he was not allowed to provide important information and pictures to the examiner, he should be afforded a new VA skin and scars examination. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998); see also Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 311 (2007). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. The AOJ must assist the Veteran in procuring any relevant VA and private medical records that have not yet been associated with the claims file. The AOJ must provide the Veteran with the proper authorization forms for release of information and ask the Veteran to complete the forms in order that VA may assist him in obtaining the records. The AOJ must provide the Veteran with the appropriate period of time to complete and return the authorization forms. If the initial request for such information is not responded to, the AOJ must issue a follow-up request. Upon receipt of authorization by the Veteran to obtain the relevant medical records, the AOJ must make reasonable efforts, at least two (2) attempts, to obtain the relevant records. All attempts to secure the relevant medical evidence must be documented in the claims file, and if, after exhausting efforts to obtain the records, they are not able to be secured and it is determined that they do not exist or that further attempts would be futile, the AOJ must provide the Veteran and his representative the required notice and opportunity to respond. 2. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the current diagnosis and etiology of each skin disorder found to be present, to include the claimed scars, dermatitis, basal cell carcinoma, and any other skin disorder found to be present, and determine the current severity of his service-connected dry skin of the hands. The entire claims file, including this remand, must be made available to the examiner. Any and all studies, tests, and evaluations deemed necessary by the examiner should be performed. For each such diagnosed skin disorder, the examiner must offer an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran's claimed skin disorder began in or otherwise is related to his active-duty service. Additionally, the examiner should report all signs and symptoms necessary for evaluating the Veteran's service-connected dry skin of the hands under the rating criteria. It should be noted that the Veteran is competent to attest to factual matters of which he has first-hand knowledge, including observable symptomatology. The examiner, or examiners, must provide a complete rationale for any opinion expressed. If an examiner is unable to reach an opinion without resort to speculation, he or she should explain the reasons for this inability and comment on whether any further tests, evidence or information would be useful in rendering an opinion. 4. After completing any additional notification and/or development deemed warranted, readjudicate the issues on appeal with consideration of the complete updated contents of the evidentiary record. If any benefit sought on appeal is not granted, the Veteran and his representative must be furnished a supplemental statement of the case that considers all of the evidence added to the record since the last supplemental statement of the case and afforded the appropriate time period for response. If necessary, return the case to the Board for further appellate review. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded. See Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). A. J. Spector Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board B. Temple, 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.