Citation Nr: 22052016 Decision Date: 09/13/22 Archive Date: 09/13/22 DOCKET NO. 17-02 728 DATE: September 13, 2022 REMANDED The issue of entitlement to service connection for dermatitis (also claimed as psoriasis) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from April 1974 to September 1974. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2015 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In July 2021, the Veteran presented testimony at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ). The hearing transcript has been associated with the claims file. In March 2022, the Board remanded the Veteran's claim for additional development. Entitlement to service connection for dermatitis (also claimed as psoriasis). In March 2022 the Board remanded for a medical opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's claimed skin disability. The Board finds the medical opinion obtained in May 2022 to be inadequate; accordingly, a new medical opinion should be obtained. See Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 311 (2007) (stating that once VA undertakes the effort to provide an examination when developing a service-connection claim, even if not statutorily obligated to do so, it must provide an adequate one or, at a minimum, notify the claimant why one will not or cannot be provided). The May 2022 examiner found that the Veteran had a skin disability that clearly and unmistakably existed prior to his active duty service, but his sole reason for finding so was based on the April 1974 Report of Medical History (ROMH) note, "yes", to the question whether the Veteran had skin diseases. The examiner did not consider the entrance examiner's accompanying finding that the veteran had a normal skin system, nor did the examiner consider any of the Veteran's statements that the condition began in service. The examiner also failed to consider the Veteran's sister's statements dated October 2009 indicating her belief that the Veteran did not have a skin disability prior to his military service. While no reasons-or-bases requirement applies to the examiner, the examiner's failing to address this evidence and relying solely on the 1974 entrance ROMH amounts to failing to provide articulated and sound reasoning based on the facts in this case, which renders his opinion inadequate. See Acevedo v. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 286, 293 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(b)(1). As noted on the March 2022 Board remand, VA treatment records shows that the Veteran was diagnosed with dermatitis, eczema, and psoriasis. See May 2017 VA treatment records. However, it is unclear what his current skin disability is. The May 2022 examiner did not clarify what the Veteran's current skin disability is or if this is different from the seborrheic dermatitis he reported on entry. In remanding this issue, the Board makes no credibility determination, expressed or implied, at this juncture. Finally, as the case is being remanded for additional development, any outstanding VA treatment records should be associated with the claims file. See Lang v. Wilkie, 971 F.3d 1348 (2020). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain any pertinent, outstanding VA treatment records and associate them with the claims file. 2. Then, schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the nature and likely etiology of any skin disability present during the appeal period. The Veteran's claims file must be made available to the examiner. The examiner must provide an opinion as to: (a.) Whether any diagnosed skin disability clearly and unmistakably existed prior to the Veteran's active duty service. A complete rationale for this opinion must be provided. (b.) If the examiner finds that a skin disability clearly and unmistakably existed prior to service, state whether it is clear and unmistakable that the pre-existing disability was NOT aggravated (i.e., permanently worsened beyond the natural course of the disease) during service. A complete rationale for this opinion must be provided. (c.) For any skin disability that did not clearly and unmistakably exist prior to service, the examiner must provide an opinion addressing whether any skin disability had its clinical onset during service or is due to an event or incident of the Veteran's period of active service. The examiner must clarify which skin diagnoses the Veteran experiences. The examiner is advised that the Veteran is competent to report symptoms, treatment, and injuries, and that his reports must be considered in formulating the requested opinion. However, if there is a medical reason to doubt its veracity, the examiner should explain why the Veteran's statements or recollection are inconsistent with the evidence in this case, medical principles relating to the onset and progress of the disease, the specific findings in the record, and/or your professional judgment. A clear rationale for all opinions would be helpful and a discussion of the facts and medical principles involved would be of considerable assistance to the Board. M. Donohue Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board L. Oquendo, 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.