Citation Nr: 1031879 Decision Date: 08/25/10 Archive Date: 09/01/10 DOCKET NO. 07-18 457 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Cleveland, Ohio THE ISSUE Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 10 percent for service- connected post-operative ganglion cyst of the right wrist, including a residual scar. REPRESENTATION Veteran represented by: Disabled American Veterans ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD L. L. Mollan, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from June 1977 to May 1982. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2006 RO decision, which continued an evaluation of 10 percent for the service-connected post-operative ganglion cyst of the right wrist, including a residual scar. For the reasons set forth below, this appeal is being REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the Veteran if further action is required. REMAND The Veteran alleges that the severity of the service-connected post-operative ganglion cyst of his right wrist, including a residual scar, warrants an increased evaluation. After a thorough review of the Veteran's claims folder, the Board has determined that additional development is necessary prior to the adjudication of this claim. The Board notes that the Veteran was last afforded a VA examination for this disability in February 2006. Subsequently, in the substantive appeal which was received at the RO in May 2007, the Veteran described a loss of function in his right hand and wrist. He also appeared to report some muscle impairment resulting from this service-connected disability. In a statement dated in July 2010, the Veteran's representative argued that this issue should be remanded, as the available evidence is too old to evaluate adequately the current state of this service-connected disability. The United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) has held that a Veteran is entitled to a new VA examination where there is evidence, including his statements, that the disability has worsened since the last examination. See Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400 (1997); Caffrey v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 377 (1994). The Court has also held that VA's statutory duty to assist the Veteran includes the duty to conduct a thorough and contemporaneous examination so that the evaluation of the claimed disability will be a fully informed one. See Green v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 121, 124 (1991). Accordingly, as the Veteran in the current appeal was last afforded a VA examination in February 2006, approximately four and half years ago, and because he has specifically been argued that this examination is too old to reflect the current state of his service-connected right wrist disability, the Board will remand the issue of entitlement to an increased evaluation for service-connected post-operative ganglion cyst of the right wrist, including a residual scar, in order to accord the Veteran a current and adequate examination. Colvin v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 171, 175 (1991) (if the medical evidence of record is insufficient, the Board is free to supplement the record by seeking an advisory opinion or ordering a medical examination). The Board also notes the Veteran's VA treatment records were most recently associated with the claims file in April 2007. VA has an obligation under the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000 (VCAA) to associate all relevant records in VA's possession with the claims file of a Veteran. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (2009). As such, the Board finds that an attempt must be made to locate any outstanding relevant VA treatment records, to include any recent VA treatment records from April 2007 to the present. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain copies of records of right wrist treatment that the Veteran received at the Wade Park Division of the VA Medical Center in Cleveland, Ohio since April 2007. All such available documents should be associated with the claims folder. 2. Provide the Veteran with an appropriate VA examination in order to determine the current severity of the service-connected post-operative ganglion cyst of his right wrist, including a residual scar. The claims folder must be made available to the examiner and pertinent documents therein should be reviewed by the examiner. All necessary tests and studies should be accomplished. All pertinent pathology associated with this service-connected disability should be set forth in the examination report. In particular, the examiner should discuss any orthopedic, muscular, or neurological pathology associated with this disorder; any symptoms related to the residual scar, as well as any functional limitation or loss of use of the right hand or wrist due to this service-connected disability. Complete rationale for all opinions expressed should be provided. 3. Then, readjudicate the issue of entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 10 percent for the service-connected post-operative ganglion cyst of the right wrist, including a residual scar. If the benefit sought on appeal remains denied, the Veteran and his representative should be provided a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC). After the Veteran has been given the applicable time to submit additional argument, the claim should be returned to the Board for further review. No further action is required of the Veteran until further notice. However, the Board takes this opportunity to advise the Veteran that the conduct of the efforts as directed in this remand, as well as any other development deemed necessary, is needed for a comprehensive and correct adjudication of his claim. His cooperation in VA's efforts to develop his claim, including reporting for any scheduled VA examination, is both critical and appreciated. The Veteran is also advised that failure to report for any scheduled examination may result in the denial of a claim. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.655 (2009). The Veteran has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter that the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board or by the Court for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner. See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2009). _________________________________________________ THERESA M. CATINO Acting Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board is appealable to the Court. This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2009).