Citation Nr: 21065069 Decision Date: 10/25/21 Archive Date: 10/25/21 DOCKET NO. 16-17 401 DATE: October 25, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an increased rating for a low back disability, characterized as degenerative disc disease, in excess of 20 percent for the period prior to December 2, 2013, and from April 1, 2014 to June 1, 2016, and in excess of 40 percent since June 1, 2016, is remanded. A rating in excess of 20 percent for left lower extremity radiculopathy from June 1, 2016, and in excess of 40 percent since that date, is remanded. A rating in excess of 20 percent for right lower extremity radiculopathy from June 1, 2016, and in excess of 40 percent since that date, is remanded. An initial rating in excess of 10 percent for a surgical scar, post diskectomy, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from October 1989 to June 1991. The Veteran was previously scheduled to appear at hearings before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) in June 2019 and August 2021. The Veteran did not appear, nor did he indicate any good cause for his non-appearance. He has not otherwise indicated a desire for a hearing since either. 1. A rating in excess of 20 percent for a low back disability, characterized as degenerative disc disease, prior to June 1, 2016, and in excess of 40 percent since that date, is remanded. 2. A rating in excess of 20 percent for left lower extremity radiculopathy prior to June 1, 2016, and in excess of 40 percent since that date, is remanded. 3. A rating in excess of 20 percent for right lower extremity radiculopathy prior to June 1, 2016, and in excess of 40 percent since that date, is remanded. 4. An initial rating in excess of 10 percent for a surgical scar, post diskectomy, is remanded. The Veteran is seeking higher ratings for his low back disability and left and right lower extremity radiculopathy disabilities in the period since June 1, 2016. Specifically, he is seeking ratings in excess of 40 percent for these disabilities. The Veteran is also seeking a rating in excess of 10 percent for a surgical scar, post diskectomy. The Board observes that the Veteran has not received VA examinations for his low back and left and right lower extremity radiculopathy disabilities since June 2011. Although the Veteran obtained an examination from a private physician which he submitted in June 2016, that was more than five years ago. The Veteran has not received a VA examination for his surgical scar since March 2014. The Board determines that new examinations are necessary to determine the current severity of his low back, left and right lower extremity radiculopathy disabilities, and his surgical scar, post diskectomy. As such, these claims will be remanded. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. The RO should invite the Veteran to submit any evidence pertinent to the present claims. 2. The RO should obtain any of the Veteran's outstanding medical records that have not been associated with his case file and associate them with the case file. 3. Schedule the Veteran for new VA examinations to determine the current severity of his low back, left and right lower extremity, and surgical scar post diskectomy disabilities. All tests deemed necessary should be conducted and the results reported in detail. The full range of motion testing must be performed in both active and passive motion, in weightbearing and non-weightbearing with range of motion measurements of the opposite undamaged joint. The examiner should determine the level of severity of the Veteran's left and right lower extremity radiculopathy within the framework set out by the VA rating criteria. If the examiner is unable to conduct the required testing or concludes that the required testing is not necessary in this case, they should clearly explain why that is so. The examiner should address in detail the additional functional impairment and range of motion loss due to factors such as pain, weakened movement, excess fatigability, incoordination, and flare-ups for each disability. The examiner(s) should estimate any additional loss of motion to the best of their ability. If it is not possible to provide a specific measurement without speculation, the examiner should 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). All opinions should be accompanied by adequate reasons and bases. If the examiner cannot provide the requested opinion without resorting to mere speculation, they should provide a complete explanation stating why this is so. In so doing, the examiner should explain whether the inability to provide a more definitive opinion is the result of a need for additional information or that they have exhausted the limits of current medical knowledge in providing an answer to that particular question(s). B.T. KNOPE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Q. Hernan, Attorney Advisor