Citation Nr: 21031386 Decision Date: 05/21/21 Archive Date: 05/21/21 DOCKET NO. 08-23 082A DATE: May 21, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an increased rating in excess of 20 percent for degenerative joint and disc disease of the thoracolumbar spine is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from March 1984 to September 1988 as well as additional service in the Air National Guard. This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2016 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Los Angeles, California. Addressing the most relevant procedural history, in July 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) issued a Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMPR) in response to the Veteran's appeal of the Board's July 2019 denial of thoracolumbar claim. The claim has now been returned to the Board for further appellate review. The Board finds that a remand is warranted in light of the JMPR. Specifically, the parties agreed that in this case there was a question as to whether there had been substantial compliance with the Board's October 2017 remand for a VA examination. In addition, given that the Veteran's last examination with a VA examiner was over three years ago in March of 2018, the Board finds that an updated examination should be obtained. Finally, the JMR noted that the evidence did not address whether the Veteran's numbness of the hands and feet were due to his back disorder. As such, the Board cannot make a fully-informed decision until the Veteran is afforded the opportunity to attend a VA examination on remand. The matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Obtain any VA treatment records for the period relevant to the issue on appeal and associate them with the record. 2. Following the completion of step one, schedule the Veteran for an examination to assess the current severity of his service-connected lumbar condition. The examiner must test the Veteran's active motion, passive motion, and pain with weight-bearing and without weight-bearing. The examiner must also attempt to elicit information regarding the severity, frequency, and duration of any flare-ups, and the degree of functional loss during flare-ups and on repeated use over time. To the extent possible, the examiner should identify any symptoms and functional impairments due to the service-connected degenerative joint and disc disease of the thoracolumbar spine alone and discuss the effect of the Veteran's condition on any occupational functioning and activities of daily living. The examiner is specifically asked to opine whether there is additional limitation of motion upon flare-ups, pain, weakness, or fatigue. The examiner must estimate the Veteran's functional loss due to flares and repeated use over time for the entire time period on appeal, based on all the evidence of record, or explain why this is not feasible. If it is not possible to provide a specific measurement, or an opinion regarding flare-ups, symptoms, or functional impairment 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). The VA examiner must also record all neurological effects of the back disorder, and should specifically address whether any numbness of the hands or feet that is found is due to the back disorder. 3. Thereafter, readjudicate the claim on appeal. If the benefits sought remain denied, issue the Veteran and his representative a supplemental statement of the case and provide a reasonable opportunity to respond before returning this matter to the Board for further appellate review. MICHAEL MARTIN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Kendra Smith, 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.