Citation Nr: 21007841 Decision Date: 02/10/21 Archive Date: 02/10/21 DOCKET NO. 16-23 744 DATE: February 10, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a rating in excess of 50 percent for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and cognitive disorder, to include a separate compensable rating for cognitive disorder, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from August 1997 to August 2000, and from July 2004 to March 2005. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2013 rating decision issued by a Regional Office (RO) of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). In March 2019, the Veteran testified at a Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of the hearing has been associated with the claims file. This matter was previously before the Board in August 2019 at which time the case was remanded for additional development; namely, to schedule the Veteran for a VA examination and to update the record with pertinent, outstanding medical records. For the reasons outlined below, there has not been substantial compliance with the Board’s August 2019 remand directives. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998) (Board remand confers a right on a claimant to compliance with the remand order). The record shows that two attempts were made to schedule the Veteran for a VA examination. The first attempt was made in November 2019 per the August 2020 supplemental statement of the case (SSOC). The actual notice letter informing the Veteran of the date and time of the examination is not on file. Notably, VA has the burden to demonstrate that notice was sent to the claimant’s last address of record. Hyson v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 262, 265 (1993). Notice means written notice sent to a claimant or payee at his or her latest address of record. 38 C.F.R. § 3.1(q). The Veteran did not report to the November 2019 examination. The second examination was scheduled in January 2020. Like the first examination, the notice letter informing the Veteran of the date and time of this examination is not on file. However, the claims file contains a screenshot of the examination details showing that the Veteran contacted the VA medical center in January 2020 and informed VA that he was unable to attend the examination due to his work schedule and that he would contact the Veterans Benefits Administration to “resubmit”. In consideration of this evidence, the Board finds that the Veteran has shown good cause for not reporting to this examination. Thus, in view of the uncertainty regarding whether the Veteran received proper notice of the November 2019 examination and the fact that he showed good cause for not reporting to the January 2020 examination, he should be rescheduled for the examination. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.655; Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). To ensure compliance with due process requirements, a copy of the notice letter informing the Veteran of the location, date, and time of the examination(s) should be associated with the claims file. Lastly, the Veteran is hereby informed that failure to report for a scheduled examination or failure to cooperate with any requested development may result in the denial of his claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.655. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Reschedule the Veteran for appropriate VA examination(s) to determine the current level of severity of all impairment resulting from his service-connected cognitive disorder and PTSD. All indicated tests should be performed, to include neuropsychological testing, and all findings should be reported in detail. The examiner should provide all information required for rating purposes. The examiner should indicate whether the manifestations of the Veteran’s cognitive disorder are clearly separable from his PTSD. If so, the examiner should describe the manifestations and provide all information required for rating purposes. 2. Confirm that the VA examination report(s) and all opinions provided comport with this remand and undertake any other development found to be warranted. 3. Then, readjudicate the issue on appeal. If a decision is adverse to the Veteran, issue a SSOC and allow appropriate time for response. Then, return the case to the Board. Kristin Haddock Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Shawkey, Anne M. 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.