Citation Nr: 21041359
Decision Date: 07/08/21	Archive Date: 07/08/21

DOCKET NO. 16-30 754
DATE: July 8, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to a compensable disability rating for scar residuals, facial burns and shrapnel wounds, prior to December 7, 2018, is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran had active military service from March 1980 to May 1992.

In an October 2020 decision, the Board remanded this claim for additional development. The Board finds that the RO did not substantially comply with its remand directive requesting a retrospective opinion concerning the severity of the facial scar disability prior to December 7, 2018. In the March 2021 remand directives, the Board instructed the VA examiner to address the Veteran's lay statements. The examiner's opinion does not address his lay statements. The examiner does state that the earlier VA examinations of record considered the Veteran's statements; however, this would not cover all of the Veteran's statements that are now of record and does not constitute true consideration by the May 2021 examiner. Additionally, the examiner does not mention the Veteran's November 2019 hearing testimony. Consequently, another remand is required. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998).

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

Obtain a retrospective medical opinion from an appropriate medical professional assessing the severity and progression of the Veteran's facial scar disability for the period prior to December 7, 2018. The examiner must address the Veteran's lay statements, including his Board hearing testimony, and reports. To the extent possible, the examiner should reconcile these states with the relevant medical evidence of record, including the Veteran's prior VA examinations, and discuss, to the extent possible, the nature and severity of the disability throughout the period on appeal. The examiner is also asked to opine, to the best of their ability, as to the accuracy of the findings reported in the May 2007, September 2013, and December 2015 VA examinations. Finally, the examiner is asked to comment on the effect of the Veteran's facial scar on his daily activities and occupational functioning, including his ability to secure and follow a substantially gainful occupation.

A complete rationale must be provided for all conclusions. If the examiner cannot address any questions posed by this remand without resorting to speculation, the examiner must clearly explain why speculation is required.

 

 

A. C. MACKENZIE

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	E. Hicks, 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.