Citation Nr: 19123294 Decision Date: 03/28/19 Archive Date: 03/27/19 DOCKET NO. 15-37 103 DATE: March 28, 2019 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for right wrist sprain (claimed as arthritis) is remanded. Entitlement to an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for left wrist sprain (claimed as arthritis) is remanded. Entitlement to an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for right hand, index and long finger sprain (claimed as arthritis) is remanded. Entitlement to an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for left hand, index and long finger sprain (claimed as arthritis) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from March 15, 2003 to June 30, 2003, February 2004 to May 2005, and January 2009 to March 2010. The Veteran additionally served multiple periods in the Army National Guard. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2015 rating decision from by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In his October 2015 VA Form 9, the Veteran requested a hearing at his local VA office. Subsequently, in May 2016, the Veteran withdrew his hearing request. The Board find that the hearing request has been withdrawn. Entitlement to ratings in excess of 10 percent for right wrist, left wrist, right- hand index finger, and left-hand index finger strains (claimed as arthritis) are remanded. The Veteran contends that increased ratings are warranted for his four service-connected musculoskeletal disorders on appeal. His most recent VA examination to assess the severity of his disabilities was in April 2015, approximately four years ago. The Board notes a June 2015 VA examination in the record, however this examination only reviewed the Veteran’s medical records and provided an opinion, it did not exam the Veteran’s pain or range of motion. Subsequent to the April 2015 VA examination, the Veteran filed a notice of disagreement (NOD) in June 2015 alleging that the range of motion in both of his wrists was not adequately documented in the April 2015 VA examination. Similarly, the Veteran contends that the pain in his hands and wrist severely limits the amount of daily activities that he can perform. In his October 2015 VA Form 9, the Veteran represents that the medication that he has been prescribed concerning these conditions does not control the pain he experiences. The Board recognizes that, generally, the mere passage of time is not a sufficient basis for a new examination. Palczewski v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 174 (2007). However, claims of worsening regarding the conditions, to include his right wrist, left wrist, right-hand index finger, and left-hand index finger strains (claimed as arthritis), have been set forth by the Veteran since his last examination four years ago. Accordingly, the Veteran must be provided a new VA examination to determine the current severity of his claims for increased ratings. See Allday v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 517 (1995); Caffrey v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 377 (1994); Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400 (1997). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain any outstanding VA treatment records and associate them with the claim file. 2. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to identify the severity of his service-connected right wrist, left wrist, right-hand index finger, and left-hand index finger strains. The examiner must review the claims file and should note that review in the report. Any studies or tests deemed necessary should be performed. The examiner should provide a complete rationale for any opinions provided. The examiner is asked to report on the nature and severity of all claimed service-connected disorders. The examination must include range of motion testing expressed in degrees for active motion, passive motion, weight-bearing, and nonweight-bearing, and for the opposing joint. Correia v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 158 (2016). (CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE) The examiner is also specifically asked to describe any functional limitation due to pain, weakened movement, excess fatigability, pain with use, incoordination, or on flare up. If the Veteran describes flare-ups of pain, the examiner should offer an opinion as to whether there would be additional limits on functional ability during flare-ups. C. TRUEBA Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD R. Smith, Associate Counsel