Citation Nr: 21013187 Decision Date: 03/08/21 Archive Date: 03/08/21 DOCKET NO. 15-07 585 DATE: March 8, 2021 ORDER An initial rating higher than 10 percent for residuals of right hand laceration with loss of mobility of the long finger is denied. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran’s right hand long finger has been limited in motion, weak in grip, and painful. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for an initial rating higher 10 percent for residuals of right hand laceration with loss of mobility of right long finger have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. § 4.71a, Diagnostic Code 5229. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from September 1973 to September 1976. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2011 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In March 2019, the Board remanded the claim for a new VA examination to comply with the holding of Correia v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 158 (2016). After the new examination was provided, a September 2020 rating decision increased the initial rating for the disability to 10 percent. The claim has now been returned to the Board. The Veteran’s loss of mobility of the long finger associated with residuals of right hand laceration is rated under Diagnostic Code (DC) 5229, for limitation of motion of the long finger. Under DC 5229, a 10-percent rating is the highest available. 38 C.F.R. § 4.71a. Turning to the evidence, at an October 1, 2010 VA examination, the Veteran reported that in service he had a laceration at the third, fourth, and fifth PIP joints on his right hand. Since that time, he had chronic angulation of his middle (long) finger at the PIP joint. He related that it interferes with his ability to make a strong fist or grip with his right hand, which is his dominant hand. At times, the joint is painful. Range-of-motion testing was all normal in the right hand except for 10 degrees of limitation of extension of the PIP joint of the long finger. Moreover, at the PIP joint the long finger was angled 10 degrees, resulting in decreased strength and dexterity. Imaging from September 2010 found “no radiographic evidence of any bony pathology.” At his job as a backflow technician, the Veteran had lost less than one week of absenteeism during the prior twelve months due to the disability. In his February 2012 notice of disagreement to the assignment of a noncompensable initial rating, the Veteran stated that as a result of his disability he does not have full control of his hand and is unable to hold any type of object with full strength. Following the Board’s prior remand, a new VA examination was provided on December 16, 2019. The Veteran reported that the condition had worsened, with flare-ups manifesting in aching pain. Range of motion during flare-ups or with repeated use over time were estimated to be 70 degrees flexion at the MCP joint, 80 degrees flexion at the PIP joint, and 50 degrees of flexion at the DIP joint. Extension was estimated to be all normal. There was objective evidence of pain in all movements. Functional limitations included impaired squeezing, gripping, and holding items. As discussed above, the 10-percent initial rating newly granted in September 2020 is the maximum rating available under DC 5229. 38 C.F.R. § 4.71a. This rating was granted dating back to the effective date of service connection. Thus, a higher initial rating is not warranted in this case. 38 C.F.R. § 3.400(o). Though the Board acknowledges the Veteran’s description of symptoms of pain as well as difficulty holding items, gripping, and making a strong fist, particularly given that his right hand is his dominant hand, such functional limitations are contemplated by the limitation-of-motion rating criteria. 38 C.F.R. § 4.71a, DC 5229. As the Veteran’s described symptoms are captured by the rating criteria of DC 5229, in this case the appropriate maximum rating has been assigned. Id. Accordingly, an initial rating higher than 10 percent is denied. 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. § 4.71a, DC 5229. K. Parakkal Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Davis, Associate Counsel 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.