Citation Nr: 18153241 Decision Date: 11/28/18 Archive Date: 11/27/18 DOCKET NO. 16-50 739 DATE: November 28, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 20 percent for service-connected right shoulder tendonitis is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from July 1973 to October 1980 and from September 1981 to July 1994. Following an April 2015 Board decision which granted service connection for right shoulder tendonitis, a September 2016 rating decision granted a 20 percent disability rating effective March 22, 2007. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 20 percent for service-connected right shoulder tendonitis is remanded. The Veteran asserts that his right shoulder tendonitis is more severe than his initial disability rating reflects. Significantly, the Board finds that he has not been afforded a VA examination to evaluate his service-connected right shoulder disability. Both the April 2015 rating decision which initially rated the Veteran’s service-connected tendonitis as noncompensable and the subsequent September 2016 rating decision which granted a 20 percent disability rating relied solely on medical treatment reports to determine the severity of his disability. As such, a remand for a VA examination to assess the severity of the Veteran’s right shoulder disability is necessary. In this regard, the Board notes that the Veteran was scheduled for a VA examination in October 2014 but cancelled the examination without cause. As such, the Board emphasizes that failure to report to a scheduled examination, without good cause, could result in denial of a claim for an increased rating, as a matter of law. 38 C.F.R. § 3.655(b) (2018). Examples of good cause include, but are not limited to, the illness or hospitalization of the claimant and death of an immediate family member. Prior to arranging for the Veteran to undergo further examination, to ensure the record is complete, the AOJ should undertake appropriate action to obtain and associate with the claims file all outstanding, pertinent records which may be relevant to the claim on appeal. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Contact the appropriate VA Medical Center and obtain and associate with the claims file all outstanding records of treatment. Request that the Veteran identify any recent private treatment pertinent to her claims and provide information and authorization sufficient for VA to assist him in obtaining any relevant medical records not yet associated with the record. 2. Then, schedule the Veteran for a VA examination by an appropriate examiner to assess the current severity of his service-connected right shoulder tendonitis. The examiner must review pertinent documents in the Veteran’s claims file in conjunction with the examination. All indicated studies should be completed and fully reported, including range of motion testing. Specifically, the examiner should provide the ranges of motion of the Veteran’s right shoulder in active motion and passive motion and in weight-bearing and nonweight-bearing motions (where appropriate). If such are not applicable, the examiner should state such along with an explanation. The examiner must provide a rationale for all opinions offered and must provide an explanation if X-ray studies are deemed not required for adequate opinions. If the examiner feels that a requested opinion cannot be rendered without resorting to speculation, he/she should state whether the need to speculate is caused by a deficiency in the state of general medical knowledge (i.e. no one could respond given medical science and the known facts), by a deficiency in the record (i.e. additional facts are required), or by the examiner himself/herself (because he/she does not have the needed knowledge or training). To help avoid an additional remand, the RO must ensure that all requested actions have been accomplished in compliance with this REMAND. If any action is not undertaken, or is taken in a deficient manner, the RO should take the appropriate corrective action, to include scheduling the Veteran for another VA examination if appropriate. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). 3. Thereafter, readjudicate the increased rating claim on appeal. If the benefits sought are not granted to the fullest extent, the Veteran and his representative should be (CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE) furnished an appropriate supplemental statement of the case and provided an opportunity to respond. The claim should be returned to the Board as warranted. THERESA M. CATINO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD N. Peden, Associate Counsel