Citation Nr: 1321684 Decision Date: 07/08/13 Archive Date: 07/18/13 DOCKET NO. 09-46 687A ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Chicago, Illinois THE ISSUE Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for a left shoulder disability (degenerative joint disease (DJD) with inferior subluxation of the humeral head). REPRESENTATION Veteran represented by: Illinois Department of Veterans Affairs WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL The Veteran ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Megan C. Kral, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The appellant is a Veteran who served on active duty from May 1989 to February 1993. This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2008 rating decision of the Chicago, Illinois Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO), which increased the rating for the left shoulder disability from 0 percent to 10 percent, effective November 7, 2007. In March 2013, a Travel Board hearing was held before the undersigned. A transcript of the hearing is associated with the record. The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the Veteran if further action on his part is required. REMAND The Veteran alleges that he has lost strength and flexibility in his left shoulder, and that use of his left arm and shoulder (to include in driving, playing with his children, and at work) is limited by pain. A review of the Veteran's claims file and Virtual VA (VA's electronic data storage system) found that the record is void of any postservice treatment he received for his left shoulder disability; from the record it is not clear whether he has received left shoulder treatment since service. At the Travel Board hearing the Veteran testified that he would not see another doctor. Records of any evaluation or treatment he received during the period under consideration would be pertinent evidence in this matter. Additionally, the Veteran was last examined by VA for his left shoulder disability in January 2008. At the March 2013 hearing, he testified that his disability had worsened since that examination (specifically that he noticed increased weakness). In this circumstance a contemporaneous examination is indicated. See Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400, 403 (1997). The Veteran is advised that failure to report for a scheduled examination may result in the denial of his claim. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.655. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The RO should ask the Veteran to identify any providers of treatment/evaluation he has received for his left shoulder disability since November 2007, and to provide the authorizations necessary for VA to obtain all private records of such treatment. The RO should obtain complete clinical records of all such treatment and evaluations from the identified sources. If any private provider does not respond to the RO's request for records identified, the Veteran should be so notified, and advised that ultimately it is his responsibility to ensure that such records are received. 2. The RO should then arrange for an orthopedic examination of the Veteran to assess the current severity of his left shoulder disability. The Veteran's entire record must be reviewed by the examiner in conjunction with the examination. The examination should include range of motion studies, with notation of any further limitations due to pain and/or use. All functional limitations must be identified. The examiner should note whether there is any pain, weakened movement, excess fatigability, flare-ups, or incoordination on movement of the left shoulder. The examiner should discuss the effect the left shoulder disability has on the Veteran's daily activities. The examiner should also discuss the functional limitations associated with, and expected impact on employment resulting from, the shoulder disability. [The record reflects that noted the Veteran works as a machinist.] The examiner must explain the rationale for all opinions. 3. The RO should then review the record and re-adjudicate the claim. If it remains denied, the RO should issue an appropriate supplemental SOC and afford the Veteran and his representative the opportunity to respond. The case should then be returned to the Board, if in order, for further review. The Veteran 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 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). _________________________________________________ GEORGE R. SENYK 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).