Citation Nr: 21024335
Decision Date: 04/22/21	Archive Date: 04/22/21

DOCKET NO. 12-29 857
DATE: April 22, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for dermatitis, to include separate ratings for scarring, is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty from May 1999 to September 2002 with additional service periods in the U.S. Navy Reserve.  

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a August 2010 decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).   

In October 2017, the Veteran testified at a video-conference hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ). A transcript of that hearing has been associated with the claims file.

In February 2018 and April 2020, the Board remanded this matter for further development. That development having been completed, this matter has returned to the Board for further appellate review.

An October 2020 rating decision, in pertinent part, granted separate ratings for the Veteran’s scars. 

Unfortunately, another remand is required as there has not been substantial compliance with the directives of the previous Board remand.  See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998) (a remand confers upon the claimant, as a matter of law, the right to compliance with the remand directives); Dyment v. West, 13 Vet. App. 141, 146-47 (1997) (noting that Stegall requires substantial compliance with remand orders, rather than absolute compliance).

In this regard, the April 2020 remand directed the RO to obtain a VA examination to address the nature and severity of the Veteran’s service-connected skin disorder.  The examiner was specifically asked to address whether any of the Veteran’s topical mediations were administered on a large enough scale such it affects the body as a whole and could be considered systemic therapy.  

The October 2020 VA examination report and November 2020 addendum did not address whether the Veteran’s topical medications, including triamcinolone, miconazole, coal tar, and mupirocin, were administered on a large enough scale and could be considered systemic therapy.  On remand, an addendum opinion should be obtained, as set forth below.

Finally, as this matter is being remanded, the Veteran’s updated VA treatment records should be obtained.  

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

1. Obtain the Veteran’s updated VA treatment records, from November 2020, forward.

2. Return the claims file to the October 2020 examiner.  If this examiner is not available, forward the claims file to another appropriate examiner.  The claims file should be made available to the examiner for review in conjunction with the opinion, to include a copy of this remand.

Following a review of the claims file, the examiner must address whether the topical medications used by the Veteran to treat his skin disability, including triamcinolone, miconazole, coal tar, and mupirocin, are administered on a large enough scale such that they affect the body as a whole and could be considered systemic therapy.  

A complete rationale for all opinions expressed must be provided.  

 

 

P.M. DILORENZO

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans’ Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Stedman, Michael

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.