Citation Nr: 1802314	
Decision Date: 01/11/18    Archive Date: 01/23/18

DOCKET NO.  15-41 209A	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Medical and Regional Office Center in Wichita, Kansas


THE ISSUE

Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 20 percent for a service-connected right ankle disability.


REPRESENTATION

Veteran represented by:	Virginia A. Girard-Brady, Attorney


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

T. Berryman, Associate Counsel



INTRODUCTION

The Veteran had active service in the Army from January 1954 to January 1957.

This case comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2013 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Wichita, Kansas.

This appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2017).  38 U.S.C. § 7107(a)(2) (2012).

The appeal is REMANDED to the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ).  VA will notify the Veteran if further action is required.


REMAND

The Veteran was granted service connection for a right ankle disability in an August 2013 rating decision and initially rated at 20 percent disabling.  The Veteran disagrees with the initial rating assigned and asserts that he is entitled to a higher rating.  He was last afforded a VA examination in January 2013.

Where the evidence of record does not reflect the current state of a veteran's disability, a VA examination must be conducted.  See Schafrath v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 589 (1991); Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400 (1997).  As such, a new examination is required to evaluate the current nature and severity of the Veteran's right ankle disability.  







Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action:

(Please note, this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c).  Expedited handling is requested.)

1.  Obtain VA treatment records from October 2015 to the present. 

2.  Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the current nature and severity of his service-connected right ankle disability.

In so doing, the examiner should ensure to the extent possible, consistent with 38 C.F.R. § 4.59, that the examination report include the results of the Veteran's active and passive motion, in addition to the results following repetitive motion testing.  If it is not possible to complete any of the range of motion testing described above, it should be explained why.  Failure to do so will result in an examination report being found inadequate.

3.  Then readjudicate the appeal.  If the claim remains denied, provide the Veteran and his representative with a supplemental statement of the case and allow an appropriate time for response. 

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 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. §§ 5109B, 7112 (2012).



_________________________________________________
MATTHEW W. BLACKWELDER
Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals

Under 38 U.S.C. § 7252 (2012), 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) (2017).