Citation Nr: 18157182 Decision Date: 12/13/18 Archive Date: 12/11/18 DOCKET NO. 15-45 010 DATE: December 13, 2018 REMANDED The issue of the propriety of the reduction in rating from 100 percent to a noncompensable rating for service-connected non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma effective August 1, 2014, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from September 1966 to August 1969. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals on appeal from a May 2014 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In that decision, the RO reduced the evaluation for service-connected non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma from 100 percent to noncompensable effective August 1, 2014. Failure to report to VA examinations Under 38 C.F.R. § 3.655, when a claimant fails to report for an examination scheduled in conjunction with an original claim, the claim shall be rated based on the evidence of record. VA regulations define an original claim as an initial application on a form prescribed by the Secretary. 38 C.F.R. § 3.160 (b). When a Veteran misses a scheduled VA examination, the Board must consider (1) whether the examination was necessary to establish entitlement to the benefit sought, and (2) whether the Veteran lacked good cause to miss the scheduled examination. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.655 (a); Turk v. Peake, 21 Vet. App. 565, 569 (2008). Examples of good cause include, but are not limited to, the illness or hospitalization of the claimant and death of an immediate family member. Id. In this case, an examination was necessary as a rating reduction case requires ascertaining whether the evidence reflects an actual change in the disability and whether the examination reports reflecting such change are based upon thorough examination. Regarding whether good cause was shown for the Veteran’s failure to report to his VA examination in September 2015, VA records revealed that the Veteran did not report to the scheduled examinations for hematologic and lymphatic conditions. In a December 2015 statement, the Veteran noted he was unable to report to the September 2015 VA examination as he was ill due to his service-connected cancer treatment. VA records recorded that a disability benefit questionnaire (DBQ) was sent to the Veteran for his primary care physician to complete; however, a copy of the DBQ is not of record. Further, it appears that a completed DBQ was not received. In May 2017, the Veteran was scheduled for a VA contract hematologic and lymphatic conditions DBQ, yet the Veteran did not attend this appointment. Upon further review, although the RO examination request appears to include the Veteran’s address of record, the record does not include notification sent to the Veteran of the scheduled May 2017 examination. Thus, it is unclear whether the Veteran was provided proper notice of the examination. As such, the Board finds that it appears that the Veteran had good cause for his failure to report to the necessary VA examination. As such, the Board finds a remand is necessary for a VA examination. The Board notes further that the Veteran has asserted that he has had ongoing treatment for his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma throughout the pendency of this appeal. There do not appear to be any relevant treatment records that post-date 2012, and it is unclear as to whether the records are complete prior to this date. These records should be obtained on remand. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain the Veteran’s relevant VA treatment records for the period from June 2007 to the present. All development efforts should be associated with the record. 2. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to assess the severity of the Veteran’s non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and document the notification sent to the Veteran. The record must be made available to the examiner and the examiner should indicate in his/her report if the record was reviewed. Any indicated tests should be accomplished. The examiner should address if the Veteran’s non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma has improved and whether the improvement actually reflects an improvement in the Veteran’s ability to function under the ordinary conditions of life and work. The Veteran’s lay assertions and medical evidence from The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center should be considered and addressed. A rationale for any opinion expressed should be provided. S. L. Kennedy Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD J. Costello, Associate Counsel