Citation Nr: 21027431 Decision Date: 05/05/21 Archive Date: 05/05/21 DOCKET NO. 20-20 639 DATE: May 5, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 20 percent for intervertebral disc syndrome (IDVS) and degenerative arthritis of the thoracolumbar spine is remanded. INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from June 1961 to June 1981. When this case was previously before the Board in August 2020 the above-noted issue was remanded for further development. The case has since been returned for additional appellate review. REASONS FOR REMAND Though unfortunate, the Board finds further development is again required before the Veteran's claim is decided. Initially, the Board observes that when VA undertakes to provide a VA examination or obtain a VA opinion, it must ensure that the examination or opinion is adequate. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 312 (2007). In Correia v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 158 (2016), the Court determined the final sentence of 38 C.F.R. § 4.59 requires VA examinations to include joint testing for pain on both active and passive motion, in weight-bearing and nonweight-bearing and, if possible, with range of motion measurements of the opposite undamaged joint. While the spine is not a paired joint such that range of motion measurements for the opposite undamaged joint are not necessary, under Correia there is a need for testing for pain on both active and passive motion and, if possible, when weight-bearing and nonweight-bearing. In the course of the most recent May 2018 VA back examination, the examiner indicated objective evidence of pain was elicited on passive, weight bearing, and non-weight bearing testing; however, the examiner failed to provide range of motion assessments. Therefore, this examination contains fatal deficiencies, and a remand is necessary to obtain an examination that satisfies sufficiency standards. Further, in a recent decision, Sharp v. Shulkin, 29 Vet. App. 26 (2017), the Court explained that VA examiners must do all that can be reasonably done to become informed about a veteran's reported musculoskeletal flare-ups prior to providing an opinion on functional loss during flares. The Court explained that examiners must consider and discuss all procurable and assembled data such as the frequency, duration, characteristics, precipitating and alleviating factors, and the severity of the flare-ups, before concluding an assessment of the functional loss during flares could not be provided without resorting to speculation. In a recent March 2021 brief, the Veteran's representative asserted the Veteran has experienced flaring episodes of back pain, which render his disability worse than previously assessed. Based on these reports, a remand is required to obtain a comprehensive assessment of the Veteran's reported flare-ups. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Afford the Veteran a VA examination by an examiner with sufficient expertise to fully assess the severity of the Veteran's service-connected thoracolumbar spine disability. All pertinent evidence of record should be made available to and reviewed by the examiner. Any indicated studies should be performed. Ensure the examiner provides all information required for rating purposes, to specifically include both active and passive range of motion testing, as well as weight-bearing and nonweight-bearing range of motion assessments. In addition, the examiner must consider and discuss all procurable and assembled data such as the frequency, duration, characteristics, precipitating and alleviating factors, and the severity of the flare-ups, and then provide an assessment of the functional loss during flares, if possible in degrees of motion lost. If the examiner is unable to conduct the required testing or concludes that the required testing is not necessary, he or she should be directed to clearly explain why that is so. T. REYNOLDS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board G. Fraser, 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.