Citation Nr: 21040969 Decision Date: 07/07/21 Archive Date: 07/07/21 DOCKET NO. 17-54 707 DATE: July 7, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a skin disorder, claimed as eczema, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Air Force from October 1986 to February 1996. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2016 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran testified at a videoconference hearing in November 2020 before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ). A transcript of the proceeding is associated with the electronic claims file. The Board previously remanded the case in November 2020 for further development. Entitlement to service connection for a skin disorder, claimed as eczema, is remanded. The Veteran is seeking to establish service connection for a skin disorder, claimed as eczema. The Veteran contends his skin disorder is related to his active duty service. In November 2020, the Board determined that remand was necessary for a VA examination that addressed the Veterans contentions, his current skin disorders, and whether there was a nexus between these current disorders and the symptoms experienced by the Veteran in service. In an April 2021 VA examination for skin conditions, a VA examiner opined that the Veteran's skin disorder was less likely than not incurred in or related to service. The examiner explained that there was no indication that the Veteran had been evaluated for eczema while in service and the few notes describing skin issues had diagnosed tinea. There was no known association between eczema, an atopic dermatitis, and tina, which was a fungal infection. The examiner noted that the Veteran may have experienced rashes in service but was not seen for rashes in service; therefore, the examiner acknowledged the Veteran's contentions but found no evidence to support them. Finally, the examiner indicated that there was no evidence of tinea on the present examination. Unfortunately, the Board finds that the April 2021 medical opinion is inadequate, as the examiner failed to comply with the Board's remand instructions. The examiner was directed to determine whether the Veteran had a current diagnosis of tinea, meaning anytime from October 2014 to the present, yet the examiner specifically noted that there was no evidence of tinea on the April 2021 examination and therefore, no current diagnosis of tinea. A Board remand confers upon an appellant the right to compliance with that order. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998); D'Aries v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 97, 105 (2008) (holding that there must be substantial compliance with the terms of a Board remand). Further, remand is warranted so that the examiner may acknowledge and discuss the Veteran's contentions that his rash/skin conditions were later diagnosed as eczema and determine whether the Veteran's current skin disorders are related to symptoms of skin disorders in service, i.e., tinea, tinea pedis, tinea corporis, allergic reaction rash, and a nevus. Once VA undertakes to provide a VA examination or obtain a VA opinion, it must ensure that the examination or opinion is adequate. See Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 311 (2007). For these reasons, the Board finds that remand for an addendum opinion is necessary. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain an addendum opinion from an appropriate clinician, regarding the Veteran's skin disorders. The claims file and a copy of this remand must be made available to the examiner. The need for an additional examination of the Veteran is left to the discretion of the clinician selected to write the addendum opinion. The examiner should respond to the following: (a) List all currently diagnosed skin disorders. "Current" includes the entire period on appeal, from October 2014 to the present. (b) Is it as least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) that the Veteran's skin disorder was caused by or otherwise related to his active duty service. An opinion should be provided for each currently diagnosed skin disorder. Please explain why or why not. In forming his or her opinion, the examiner is asked to specifically note the Veteran's service treatment records reflecting diagnoses of tinea (February to April 1991, right hand), tinea pedis(December 1994), tinea corporis(November 1994, right knee), allergic reaction rash (February 1992), a March 1991 complaint of "itchy" "bumps" (with a diagnosis of a nevus), and a November 1999 treatment record noting that the Veteran complained of a rash behind his right knee that he had experienced on and off for approximately 10 years. Additionally, the examiner is asked to discuss the Veteran's contentions that he experienced rashes in service that were diagnosed as eczema during post-service treatment. The examination report must include a complete rationale for all opinions expressed. If the examiner feels that a requested opinion cannot be rendered without resorting to speculation, the examiner must state whether the need to speculate is caused by a deficiency in the state of general medical knowledge (i.e., no one could respond given medical science and the known facts) or by a deficiency in the record or the examiner (i.e., additional facts are required, or the examiner does not have the needed knowledge or training). 2. After completing the above, and any other development as may be indicated by any response received as a consequence of the actions taken in the preceding paragraphs, the Veteran's claim should be readjudicated based on the entirety of the evidence. If any benefit sought remains denied, furnish the Veteran and his representative a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) and return the case to the Board. KRISTI L. GUNN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board L. Silverblatt, 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.