Citation Nr: 20037510 Decision Date: 06/02/20 Archive Date: 06/02/20 DOCKET NO. 15-42 823A DATE: June 2, 2020 REMANDED Service connection for vertigo is remanded. Service connection for headaches, to include as secondary to vertigo, is remanded. Service connection for allergies, to include rhinitis, is remanded. A rating in excess of 10 percent for neck arthritis is remanded. A rating in excess of 10 percent for back arthritis is remanded. A rating in excess of 10 percent for bilateral knee arthritis is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from March 1993 to April 2013. The Board regrets the delay but find a remand is necessary in the Veteran’s claim to a rating in excess of 10 percent for arthritis in his neck, back and knees. The Board notes the RO had all of these disabilities grouped as one disability. First, the Board finds a remand in this case is required for an issuance of a statement of the case (SOC) for the Veteran’s claims to a higher rating for his back and his knee arthritis. While an SOC was issued in November 2015, it only addressed the Veteran’s claim to a higher rating for his neck arthritis. Manlincon v. West, 12 Vet. App. 238 (1999). Also, the Board notes the Veteran was granted service connection for arthritis in his neck, back, and both knees in an August 2013 rating decision. However, each of these disabilities was grouped into one disability under DC 5003. The Board notes this is improper, and the Veteran should have a separate rating for each disability for which he was service connected. Therefore, on remand, this error should be remedied. Pertaining to all of the Veteran’s claims, the Board finds a remand is necessary to obtain potentially missing medical records. In October 2017, the Veteran’s representative submitted a statement saying the “Veteran has consistently sought treatment for these issues since leaving active service although it does not appear that subsequent medical treatment records were utilized in preparation of the De Novo review and the Statement of the Case.” The Board finds a remand is required in order to obtain medical records. In this regard, it would be of great help to the Board if the Veteran or his representative would submit the records cited about themselves. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. The AOJ should obtain any of the Veteran’s outstanding VA and private medical records and associate them with the claims file. If possible, the Veteran herself should submit any pertinent new evidence regarding the condition at issue in order to expedite the claim. 2. If the RO finds there were missing medical records that were in existence but not reviewed by the February 2013 examiners, these examinations will be inadequate and new examinations will be necessary and the Veteran should be scheduled for such examinations as appropriate. 3. Ensure the Veteran’s arthritis of his neck, back, and knees are rated appropriately as individual disabilities. 4. Readjudicate the issues on appeal. If the determinations remain adverse to the Veteran, he must be provided with a statement of the case. An appropriate period of time must then be allowed for a response before the record is returned to the Board for further review. John J. Crowley Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Snoparsky The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.