Citation Nr: 21006196 Decision Date: 02/03/21 Archive Date: 02/03/21 DOCKET NO. 17-46 123 DATE: February 3, 2021 REMANDED Service connection for a skin disorder, to include lichenoid dermatitis, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from January 1988 to April 1991. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from a July 2014 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In February 2020, the Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge at a videoconference hearing. A transcript is of record. Service connection for a skin condition, to include lichenoid dermatitis, is remanded. The Veteran seeks service connection for a skin condition, to include lichenoid dermatitis. The Veteran contends his skin condition onset during service in South Korea. See, e.g., June 2014 VA Form 21-4138. Unfortunately, further development is necessary prior to adjudication. First, the Board acknowledges a June 2014 notification letter indicates that the Veteran’s service treatment records are unavailable for review. However, the July 2013 and February 2017 VA Forms 21-3101 indicate that the requests were limited to the Veteran’s period of active duty from January 1988 to April 1991. As the Veteran’s active service records are unavailable, and the Veteran has reported his skin condition onset during active service with continuous symptoms thereafter, Reserve service records may provide evidence helpful to the claim. On remand, the RO should attempt to obtain any Reserve service records. Additionally, the Veteran is competent to report information within the realm of his personal knowledge, to include the onset and recurrence of his skin symptoms. McCartt v. West, 12 Vet. App. 164, 167-68 (1999). The Veteran has reported his symptoms onset during service in South Korea and have progressed since. The Veteran’s available military personnel records reflect service in Korea. An August 2016 disability benefits questionnaire completed by the Veteran’s private physician also notes diagnoses of dermatitis, tinea pedis, lichen planus, unspecified disorder, molluscum contagiosum, epidermal cyst, other specified dermatitis, other acne, pruritis, and lichen simplex. An August 2017 VA pension examination notes a current diagnosis of dermatitis. In April 2020, the Veteran submitted several studies purporting to discuss environmental exposures and skin conditions, both generally and in South Korea. Since the Veteran’s service treatment records appear to be unavailable due to no fault of his own, and there is competent evidence of record suggesting onset of a skin disorder in service with some recurrence thereafter, the Board finds the low standard of McLendon has been met. See McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79, 81 (2006); see also Waters v. Shinseki, 601 F.3d 1274, 1278 (2010). On remand, an opinion on the nature and etiology of the Veteran’s skin disorder should be obtained. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Appropriate attempts should be made to obtain any service treatment records from the Veteran’s service in the Reserves. All actions to obtain the records should be documented. If the records cannot be located or do not exist, a memorandum of unavailability should be associated with the file, and the Veteran should be notified and given an opportunity to provide them. 2. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination for his skin disorder(s). The examiner must review the claims file. The examiner is asked to provide a response to the following: Are any of the Veteran’s current skin disabilities at least as likely as not related to service, including his reported in-service symptoms? In formation of the opinion and rationale, the examiner should consider the studies submitted by the Veteran. The examiner is also reminded that the Veteran is competent to report information within the realm of his personal knowledge. Thus, in providing the requested opinion, consider the Veteran’s description of his in-service and post-service symptoms. If there is any medical reason to accept or reject the proposition that the Veteran’s reported symptoms in service and thereafter represented the onset of his current disability, this should be noted. Stated another way, do the Veteran’s reports about his symptoms align with how the currently diagnosed disability is known to develop or are the Veteran’s reports generally inconsistent with medical knowledge or implausible? D. JOHNSON Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board M.Aoughsten, 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.