Citation Nr: 21041029 Decision Date: 07/07/21 Archive Date: 07/07/21 DOCKET NO. 17-38 473 DATE: July 7, 2021 ORDER New and material evidence having not been received, the claim to reopen entitlement to service connection for back strain, with mild degenerative changes and scoliosis (back disability) is denied. REMANDED Whether the Veteran is competent to handle disbursement of VA funds is remanded. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran's claim for a back disability was most recently denied in a November 2013 decision by the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board); the Veteran did not thereafter file an appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims within the appeal period of that decision. 2. The additional evidence received since the November 2013 Board decision does not raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim for entitlement to service connection for a back disability, nor does it relate to an unestablished fact necessary to establish the claim. CONCLUSION OF LAW New and material evidence has not been received sufficient to reopen a claim for a back disability. 38 U.S.C. § 5108 (2018); 38 C.F.R. § 3.156 (2020). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from December 1979 to July 1980. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal of a March 2015 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran requested a personal hearing before a member of the Board in her June 2017 VA Form 9 (formal appeal). The Veteran was scheduled for her requested hearing on February 10, 2020. However, the Veteran did not appear at the scheduled hearing. As such, the request for a Board hearing is deemed withdrawn. 38 C.F.R. § 20.704(d) (2020). New and material evidence having not been received, the claim to reopen entitlement to service connection for back strain, wild mild degenerative changes and scoliosis (back disability) is denied. A previously denied claim may be reopened by the submission of new and material evidence. 38 U.S.C. § 5108; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156. Evidence is new if it has not been previously submitted to agency decision makers. Id. Evidence is material if it, either by itself or considered in conjunction with previous evidence of record, relates to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claim. Id. In a November 2013 decision, the Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a back disability on the basis that, while the Veteran had a current disability, the most competent and probative medical evidence was against a finding that the back disability began in service or was otherwise related to service. The evidence of record at the time of the November 2013 decision included service treatment records, post-service VA and private treatment records, the Veteran's lay statements, and several examination reports with etiological opinions. Evidence received since the last final denial includes MRI and x-ray reports showing degenerative disc disease of the spine. The Veteran has also submitted a statement in which she noted that she saw a doctor within a year of discharge because of problems with her back, vertigo, and headaches. She noted that all of "these reports are in the files which I submitted to the VA." In this regard, the new evidence does not suggest an in-service injury or illness, or otherwise suggest a nexus to service. As the Veteran points out, her statements regarding her treatment within a year of discharge have already been submitted, and considered by VA. Consequently, the Board finds that new and material evidence has not been received in this matter, and the request to reopen the previously denied claim for a back disability is denied. REASONS FOR REMAND Whether the Veteran is competent to handle disbursement of VA funds is remanded. By way of background, a February 2013 rating decision determined that the Veteran was not competent to handle disbursement of VA funds, based on VA examinations dated from March 2011, April 2012, and November 2012. In March 2014, the Veteran asserted that she was currently able to manage her VA benefits. She subsequently submitted a June 2016 statement from her treating physician, who indicated that the Veteran was capable of managing her finances at this time. Due to the conflicting evidence of record and the time that has passed since the Veteran was last examined, the Board finds that the current record is not "clear and convincing" as to whether the Veteran is competent for purposes of disbursement of VA funds. 38 C.F.R. § 3.353 (c). Consequently, the Veteran should be provided a VA examination to specifically discuss her competency to manage her VA funds. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule the Veteran for a VA medical examination to obtain an opinion to ascertain the Veteran's competency. The examiner should opine as to whether the Veteran is competent to handle disbursement of VA funds. A rationale for all opinions and a discussion of the facts and medical principles involved should be provided. 2. Then, readjudicate the claim. If a decision is adverse to the Veteran, issue a supplemental statement of the case and allow the appropriate time for response. Then, return the claim to the Board. Kristin Haddock Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Roya Bahrami, 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.