Citation Nr: 18146822
Decision Date: 11/01/18	Archive Date: 11/01/18

DOCKET NO. 18-01 822
DATE:	November 1, 2018
REMANDED
Entitlement to a rating greater than 20 percent for degenerative disc disease of thoracolumbar spine is remanded.
Entitlement to a rating greater than 10 percent for right lower extremity radiculopathy is remanded.
REASONS FOR REMAND
The Veteran served on active duty from June 1966 to June 1968. 
An SSOC must be furnished to an appellant and his representative when additional pertinent evidence is received after a previous SOC or SSOC has been issued. 38 C.F.R. § 19.31. In this case, no SSOC has addressed the additional pertinent VA medical evidence added to the evidence of record after the SOC was issued in October 2017. Therefore, the Board will remand for the AOJ to consider this evidence in the first instance. 38 C.F.R. § 19.37(a).
In addition, as there is evidence that the Veteran’s back disability may have worsened since the last VA examination, the Board finds that a remand for a VA examination is necessary to assess the Veteran’s current severity. See Weggenmann v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 281 (1993); see also Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400 (1997) (a Veteran is entitled to a new examination where there is evidence that the condition may have worsened since the last examination).
The matters are REMANDED for the following action:
1. Obtain updated VA treatment records and all pertinent private medical records identified by the Veteran. 
2. Thereafter, schedule the Veteran for an appropriate VA examination to determine the current level of severity of the Veteran’s degenerative disc disease of thoracolumbar spine and right lower extremity radiculopathy. The examiner should review the file and provide a complete rationale for all opinions expressed. 
Range of motion should be reported, including whether and the extent to which such motion is affected by pain, weakness, fatigue, lack of endurance, incoordination or other symptoms resulting in functional loss. If the examiner is unable to conduct the required testing or concludes that the required testing is not necessary in this case, he or she should clearly explain why that is so.
If the examination does not take place during a flare-up, the examiner should elicit relevant information as to the Veteran’s flare ups, ask the Veteran to describe additional functional loss and then estimate the functional loss due to flare ups based on all the evidence of record.
(Continued on the next page)
 
The examiner must provide a comprehensive report including complete rationales for all opinions and conclusions reached, citing the objective medical findings to the conclusions.
 
DELYVONNE M. WHITEHEAD 
Acting Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	M.D., Associate Counsel