Citation Nr: 1106325 Decision Date: 02/16/11 Archive Date: 02/28/11 DOCKET NO. 07-18 714 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Columbia, South Carolina THE ISSUE Entitlement to an increased rating in excess of 10 percent for residuals of a laceration on the right bicep. REPRESENTATION Veteran represented by: The American Legion ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Shana Z. Siesser, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from November 2003 to April 2004. This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2007 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Columbia, South Carolina. The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the appellant if further action is required. REMAND The RO denied the Veteran's claim for an increased rating for residuals of a laceration of the right bicep in a January 2007 rating decision. The Veteran contends the 10 percent rating does not accurately reflect the severity of his disability. The Board presently remands this appeal to enable the RO to ascertain the severity of the service-connected disorder, and to clarify the RO's findings in accordance with the applicable provisions of VA's Schedule for Rating Disabilities (Schedule). Massey v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 204 (1994) (holding in part that in schedular rating claims, VA may only consider the factors as enumerated in the Schedule). The Veteran, through his representative, contends that the Veteran's case is not ripe for appellate review, as the most recent VA examination took place in December 2006. The Veteran is contending that his symptoms have increased in severity since the time of his last VA examination and therefore, he requires a new examination to determine his current rating. The mere passage of time, alone, is not sufficient to trigger a remand for another examination. See Palczewski v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 174 (2007). However, the Veteran has claimed that his condition has worsened since the time of his last VA examination. The Veteran is competent to report a worsening of symptoms. Proscelle v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 629 (1992) (holding that, in general, for the need for a VA examination to arise, a claimant would only need submit his competent testimony that symptoms, reasonably construed as related to the service-connected disability, have increased in severity since the last evaluation.). In light of the passage of time since the last examination, and because the Veteran is competent to report a worsening of his residuals of a laceration of the right bicep, a new examination is in order. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The RO/AMC must ascertain whether the Veteran has received any VA, non-VA, or other medical treatment for his disorder that is not evidenced by the current record. The Veteran should be provided with the necessary authorizations for the release of any treatment records not currently on file. Any additional treatment records not currently of record should be obtained and associated with the claims folder. 2. After any additional records have been associated with the file, the RO/AMC shall schedule the Veteran for an examination to determine the current symptoms and severity of the Veteran's residuals of a laceration to his right bicep. The following considerations will govern the examination: a. The claims file, and a copy of this remand, must be made available to the examiner for review in conjunction with the examination, and the examiner must acknowledge receipt and review of these materials in any report generated as a result of this remand. b. All indicated tests and studies must be performed, and any indicated consultations must be scheduled. c. In all conclusions, the examiner must identify and explain the medical basis or bases for the conclusion, with identification of the evidence of record relied upon in reaching the conclusion. d. The examiner must determine the extent and manifestations of any right bicep scar(s) found upon clinical evaluation. Detailed clinical findings should be made as to each scar. The examiner should describe the location of each right bicep scar(s), and respond to each of the following questions with respect to each scar noted upon clinical evaluation: e. The examiner must determine the degree of any limitation of flexion and/or extension of the right arm; any functional loss or loss on use, and if there is any clinical basis for the Veteran's report of the severity of the disorder. All findings must be reported in detail. 3. Thereafter, the RO/AMC shall review the Veteran's claim for entitlement to a rating higher than 10 percent for residuals of a laceration of the right bicep. If the claim is denied, issue a supplemental statement of the case to the Veteran and his representative, and provide an opportunity to respond, before the case is returned to the Board. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters 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 of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner. See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2010). _________________________________________________ Vito A. Clementi Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. 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) (2010).