Citation Nr: 21003593 Decision Date: 01/22/21 Archive Date: 01/22/21 DOCKET NO. 17-27 739 DATE: January 22, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a compensable rating for residuals of a stress fracture of the third metatarsal of the left foot is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served honorably in the Army from May 2008 to March 2010. This appeal to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) is from a March 2016 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran recently testified in support of this claim during a virtual hearing in October 2020 before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) of the Board. A transcript of the hearing since has been associated with the file, so is of record. Entitlement to a compensable rating for residuals of the stress fracture of the third metatarsal of the left foot is remanded. The Veteran pointed out during his recent hearing that his last VA examination for his left foot stress fracture of the third metatarsal was in January 2016, so some 5 years ago, and that in the years since his disability has worsened appreciably. He therefore requests a new examination reassessing the severity of this service-connected disability, and the Board agrees that a more recent examination is needed. See Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400, 403 (1997). Accordingly, this claim is REMANDED for the following action: 1. If there are VA and/or private treatment records needing to be obtained, obtain them and appropriately notify the Veteran and his representative if unable to. 2. After receiving all additional treatment or other relevant records, or determining no additional records are forthcoming, schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician reassessing the severity of the service-connected residuals of the stress fracture of the third metatarsal of his left foot. (a.) The examiner should provide a full description of this disability and report all signs and symptoms necessary for evaluating it under the applicable rating criteria. (b.) In so doing, the examiner must attempt to elicit information regarding the severity, frequency, and duration of any flare-ups and the degree of functional loss during flare-ups. If it is not possible to provide a specific measurement based on direct observation, the examiner should provide an estimate, if possible, of the additional impairment due to flare-ups based on the other evidence of record and the Veteran’s statements. If it is not possible to provide a specific measurement without speculation, the examiner must state whether the need to speculate is due to a deficiency in the state of general medical knowledge (no one could respond given medical science and the known facts), a deficiency in the record (additional facts are required), or the examiner (does not have the knowledge or training), or whatever other reason precludes responding. To assist in making these determinations, the claims file, including a complete copy of this remand, must be made available to the examiner for review and consideration of the relevant history. When responding, whether favorably or unfavorably, it is essential the examiner provide explanatory rationale – preferably citing to evidence in the file supporting conclusions and/or accepted medical authority. KEITH W. ALLEN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board C. B. Kucera 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.