Citation Nr: 21076090
Decision Date: 12/22/21	Archive Date: 12/22/21

DOCKET NO. 17-30 174
DATE: December 22, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to a compensable rating for a right salpingo-oophorectomy and removal of fallopian tube is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty from April 1986 to April 2006.  The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is grateful for her service.  

In March 2019, the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) remanded the claim for additional development.  It now returns to the Board for further review.  

Entitlement to a compensable rating for a right salpingo-oophorectomy and removal of fallopian tube is remanded.

Regrettably, remand is again required prior to the Board's adjudication of the appealed claim.  

Pursuant to the Board's March 2019 remand, the Veteran was afforded a VA examination in June 2019 to address the claimed disability.  Thereafter in August 2020, the VA Regional Office (RO)  issued a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) addressing the appealed claim.  However, the Veteran was then afforded another examination in April 2021 also addressing the claimed disability, and thereafter in April 2021 the RO issued a rating action again adjudicating the appealed claim, but failed to issue an SSOC.  In October 2021, the Board sent the Veteran a letter requesting waiver of agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) review of the appeal (issuance of another SSOC) prior to the Board's adjudication.  However, the Veteran did not reply to that request for waiver.  Automatic waiver provisions of 38 U.S.C. § 7105 (e) do not apply to VA-generated evidence and the October 2021 letter stated that if a response was not received in 45 days, the Board would remand the appeal to the AOJ for review.  Accordingly, remand for issuance of a new SSOC is warranted.  Manlincon v. West, 12 Vet. App. 238 (1999).

The matter is REMANDED for the following action:

Issue a new SSOC addressing the appealed claim.  Thereafter, return the appeal to the Board for further review.  

 

 

L. CHU

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	D. Schechter

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 This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.