Citation Nr: 21008443 Decision Date: 02/17/21 Archive Date: 02/17/21 DOCKET NO. 20-23 349 DATE: February 17, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for abdominal scars, associated with prostate cancer residuals (abdominal scars), is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for lower abdomen, sub-umbilical painful scars, associated with prostate cancer residuals (painful scars), is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from November 1967 to September 1970. Though these matters come before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2017 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) regional office, they were initially addressed in a December 2016 rating decision. These matters were previously remanded by the Board in July 2020. As an initial matter, the Board notes that the issue of entitlement to a compensable rating for erectile dysfunction, associated with prostate cancer, was remanded in the July 2020 Board decision. While on remand, in a November 2020 rating decision, a rating of 20 percent was assigned, effective November 2, 2016, the date the Veteran received an implanted inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP), resulting in a penile deformity. This represents the maximum benefit allowed by law and regulation for his service-connected erectile dysfunction. As such, there remains no case or controversy, or dispute of fact or law, regarding the issue, and it will not be addressed herein. See 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.22. Additionally, the Board notes that, during the pendency of these matters, the Veteran was assigned a separate 10 percent rating for painful scars, effective September 19, 2016, in a November 2020 rating decision. As this increase does not represent a total grant of benefits sought on appeal, the claim for an initial higher rating for abdominal scars remains before the Board. See AB v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 25 (1993). REASONS FOR REMAND 1. Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for abdominal scars is remanded. 2. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for painful scars is remanded. The Board regrets the delay associated with this remand. However, based on a review of the evidence of record, the Board finds that a remand is necessary to allow the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) to provide the Veteran with an examination regarding the current severity of his service-connected painful scars. The Veteran was last afforded a VA examination regarding his abdominal scars in October 2020. In this examination, the examiner noted six abdominal scars, none of which were unstable, and with only sub-umbilical scar presenting as painful. See October 2020 VA Scars DBQ. The evidence indicates that the Veteran’s painful scars may have worsened since this examination. Specifically, in a December 2020 correspondence, the Veteran reported having five abdominal scars and that some of the scars change colors when touched or when the weather is too cold or too hot. The Veteran also reported that all of his scars are painful and tender, though he could not differentiate which scar is painful when, and that he feels a sharp pain when he turns a certain way. Lastly, the Veteran reported that his physician told him to take ibuprofen if the scars are painful, and that although he has not had to take medication, he is careful when putting on clothes and moving to avoid pain. See December 2020 Veteran’s Affidavit. Therefore, based on the statements indicating an increase in severity, the Board finds that a new VA examination is needed to ascertain the current severity of his service-connected painful scars. See Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400 (1997); Caffrey v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 377 (1994). Accordingly, the matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. With the Veteran’s assistance as appropriate, ensure that any outstanding treatment records, whether VA or private, are associated with the claims file, including VA treatment records from November 2020 to current. Pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(e), any efforts to secure these records MUST be documented in the electronic claims file and the Veteran must be informed if any such records are unable to be secured. 2. The Board recognizes the potential practical difficulties in scheduling an examination in light of the COVID-19 epidemic and requests flexibility and understanding in affording the Veteran any warranted examination. 3. After completing the development above, and any additional development warranted by the record, schedule the Veteran for an examination with an appropriate clinician to assess the current nature and severity of his service-connected abdominal scars. The entire claims file must be provided to, and reviewed by, the examiner, and any indicated tests, studies, or evaluations should be performed. The examiner is asked to: (a.) Obtain the Veteran’s detailed lay history, including onset and progression of symptomatology. (b.) Complete the relevant section of the appropriate rating examinations. (c.) Identify the number of scars present and state whether each identified scar is unstable or painful. (d.) Identify whether any scar is deep associated with underlying soft tissue damage or causes limited motion. (e.) Identify whether any scar has any other disabling effects. (f.) Specifically consider and address the Veteran’s December 2020 assertions that: i. All of his abdominal scars present with pain; and ii. His abdominal scars change colors when touched or when the weather is too cold or too hot. Any opinion expressed by the examiner should be accompanied by a complete rationale. If medical literature is relied upon in rendering a determination, the examiner should identify and specifically cite each reference material utilized. If the examiner is unable to offer an opinion without resort to speculation, a thorough explanation as to why an opinion cannot be rendered should be provided. 4. The AOJ must review the claims file and ensure that the foregoing development action has been completed in full. If any development action is incomplete, the appropriate corrective action must be implemented. If any report or opinion does not include adequate responses to the specific reports or opinions requested, it must be returned to the providing examiner for corrective action. YVETTE R. WHITE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J. T. Martin III, 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.