Citation Nr: 1319986 Decision Date: 06/20/13 Archive Date: 07/02/13 DOCKET NO. 07-21 725 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Seattle, Washington THE ISSUE Entitlement to an extraschedular evaluation in excess of 10 percent for right elbow strain with limitation of pronation of right forearm, residuals of right hand and wrist injury. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD E. D. Anderson, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from October 1980 to April 1983. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2006 rating decision rendered by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Seattle, Washington. The Veteran testified at an RO hearing in September 2009. He also appeared at a Travel Board hearing in August 2010 before a Veterans Law Judge. Transcripts of the hearing testimony are associated with the claims file. In January 2013, the Board remanded this matter to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC) in Washington, D.C. to refer the Veteran's claim to the Director, Compensation and Pension Service for extraschedular consideration. The action specified in the January 2013 Remand completed, the matter has been properly returned to the Board for appellate consideration. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). 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 As noted above, in January 2013, the Board remanded this matter so that the Veteran's claim could be referred to the Director, Compensation and Pension Service, for extraschedular consideration. In April 2013, the Director, Compensation and Pension Service issued a memorandum opining that the Veteran was not entitled to an extraschedular evaluation in excess of 10 percent for his right elbow and forearm disability. However, in this opinion, the Director does not discuss the Veteran's most recent VA examination, a January 2010 QTC examination, nor is this examination listed in the evidence considered and reviewed by her prior to issuing her decision. While it is possible that this is just an oversight, as the findings on the January 2010 VA examination are relevant to the Veteran's claim, the Board finds that a remand is required to ensure that the Director, Compensation and Pension Service has reviewed all of the evidence in the Veteran's claims folder. On remand, this case should again be referred to the Director, Compensation and Pension Services for extraschedular consideration. In his or her opinion, the Director should note that the January 2010 examination was reviewed. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Submit the Veteran's increased rating claim for right elbow strain with limitation of pronation of right forearm, residuals of right hand and wrist injury, for an extraschedular evaluation under 38 C.F.R. § 3.321(b) to include a full statement as to the Veteran's service-connected disabilities, employment history, educational and vocational attainment and all other factors having a bearing on the issue. Actions taken thereafter should proceed in accordance with the directives of the Under Secretary for Benefits or Director, Compensation and Pension Service. The Veteran's entire disability picture should be considered, including his right wrist and forearm and how they function as a whole, in determining whether an extraschedular evaluation is warranted. The Under Secretary for Benefits or Director, Compensation and Pension Service should note in his/ her opinion that the January 2010 QTC examination was reviewed. 2. When the development requested has been completed, and the RO has ensured compliance with the requested action, this case should again be reviewed by the RO on the basis of the additional evidence. If the benefit sought is not granted, the Veteran and his representative should be furnished a Supplemental Statement of the Case, and be afforded a reasonable opportunity to respond before the record is returned to the Board for further review. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter 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. 2012). _________________________________________________ K. Parakkal 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) (2012).