Citation Nr: 1329509 Decision Date: 09/13/13 Archive Date: 09/20/13 DOCKET NO. 11-34 356 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Reno, Nevada THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to a disability evaluation in excess of 20 percent for degenerative disc disease of the cervical spine. 2. Entitlement to a disability evaluation in excess of 20 percent for degenerative arthritis of the thoracolumbar spine, with low back pain. REPRESENTATION Veteran represented by: Nevada Office of Veterans' Services ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Sara Schinnerer, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from June 1951 to June 1977. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2010 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Reno, Nevada. This appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket. 38 U.S.C.A. § 7107(a)(2) (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2013). The appeal is remanded to the RO via the Appeals Management Center in Washington, DC. REMAND Additional development is required before the issues on appeal can be adjudicated. Regarding his service-connected spine disorders, in a June 2013 statement, the Veteran reported that he sought treatment from M.C., M.D., in Las Vegas, Nevada. Specifically, he indicated that that he underwent x-rays of the thoracolumbar spine in May 2013, as well as magnetic resonance imaging of such, in June 2013. He further reported that he was scheduled for physical therapy in August 2013. While the June 2013 records have been associated with the record, the May and August 2013 records have not been associated with the record. Therefore, the RO must obtain the Veteran's private treatment records from Dr. M.C. dated in May 2013 to the present, and associate them with the record. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(1) (2013). Finally, following the issuance of the most recent July 2013 supplemental statement of the case, private treatment records dated in January 2012 were added to the evidence of record that the RO has not considered. The Veteran did not waive initial consideration by the RO of these records. Therefore, the additional evidence must be considered by the RO prior to appellate review. 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.37, 20.1304 (2013). Accordingly, the case is remanded for the following action: 1. The RO must contact the Veteran and afford him the opportunity to identify or submit any additional pertinent evidence in support of his claims. Based on his response, the RO must attempt to procure copies of all records which have not previously been obtained from identified treatment sources. Regardless of the Veteran's response, the RO must obtain the Veteran's private treatment records from M.C., M.D., located in Las Vegas, Nevada dated in May 2013 to the present, and his complete VA outpatient treatment records to the present. All records obtained must be associated with the evidence of record. All attempts to secure this evidence must be documented in the claims file by the RO. If, after making reasonable efforts to obtain these records the RO is unable to secure same, the RO must notify the Veteran and (a) identify the specific records the RO is unable to obtain; (b) briefly explain the efforts that the RO made to obtain those records; (c) describe any further action to be taken by the RO with respect to the claim; and (d) that he is ultimately responsible for providing the evidence. The Veteran and his representative must then be given an opportunity to respond. 2. After completing the above actions, and any other development as may be indicated by any response received as a consequence of the actions taken in the paragraph above, the claims must be readjudicated. If the benefits sought on appeal remain denied, a supplemental statement of the case must be provided to the Veteran and his representative, which must include consideration of the evidence associated with the record after July 2013. After the Veteran and his representative have had an adequate opportunity to respond, the appeal must be returned to the Board for appellate review. No action is required by the Veteran until he receives further notice; however, he may present additional evidence or argument while the case is in remand status at the RO. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). _________________________________________________ JOY A. MCDONALD 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).