Citation Nr: 18149694
Decision Date: 11/13/18	Archive Date: 11/13/18

DOCKET NO. 16-46 167
DATE:	November 13, 2018
REMANDED
Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 20 percent for lumbar degenerative disease is remanded.
REASONS FOR REMAND
The Veteran served on active duty from June 1985 to March 1997.
This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2014 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).  
In May 2017, the Veteran was awarded total disability based on individual unemployability (TDIU) with an effective date of July 4, 2014.  See May 2017 Rating Decision.  The Veteran has filed a notice of disagreement with respect to the effective date of his TDIU claim.  See April 2018 NOD.  This matter has not yet been certified to the Board.  Therefore, the Board has no jurisdiction over this claim and it will not be addressed at this time.  
Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 20 percent for lumbar degenerative disease.
In a September 2016 Form 9, the Veteran’s attorney contends that among other things, the July 2016 statement of the case did not consider all medical evidence in this case.  See September 2016 Form 9.  The Board agrees, and this matter must be remanded. 
As discussed above, in February 2015, the Veteran’s representative filed an informal notice of disagreement seeking a rating in excess of 20 percent and TDIU.  See February 2015 Third Party Correspondence.  Concurrent with the notice of disagreement, the Veteran’s representative submitted additional evidence including three letters from the Veteran’s private treating physician, a medical disability questionnaire from the Veteran’s private treating physician, an April 2013 MRI and x-ray of the Veteran’s lumbar spine, and a March 2014 informal physical evaluation board proceeding.  See February 2015 Third Party Correspondence.  These documents were added to the Veteran’s file in February 2015. 
Additional medical records were added to the file after the Veteran’s notice of disagreement.  Many of these records predate the February 2014 rating decision and are a duplicate of medical records already in the record. 
An SOC was issued in July 2016.  In the SOC, the RO identified two pieces of evidence that were considered; a February 2013 VA examination and Social Security Administration records received on April 30, 2015.  The records submitted with the Veteran’s notice of disagreement were not addressed.  Except for the May 2012 letter from the Veteran’s private physician, this evidence is new evidence submitted after the February 2014 rating decision.  Further, this evidence is directly related to the severity of the Veteran’s lumbar degenerative disease.  In rendering a decision, the RO must consider all relevant evidence of record at the time of the decision.  Accordingly, this matter must be remanded for the issuance of a supplemental statement of the case. 
The matter is REMANDED for the following action:
1. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to evaluate the current severity of his service-connected lumbar spine.
2. Thereafter, readjudicate the claim, to include consideration of the December 2014 medical opinion of Dr. McCloskey, SSA decision granting the Veteran benefits, and all evidence received following the July 2016 SOC and issue a SSOC. 

 
S. HENEKS
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	A. Wimbish, Associate Counsel