Citation Nr: 21032222 Decision Date: 05/26/21 Archive Date: 05/26/21 DOCKET NO. 17-50 140 DATE: May 26, 2021 ORDER Restoration for the 10 percent rating for ulnar nerve neuropathy of the right wrist is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. In a November 2014 rating decision, the RO reduced the Veteran's disability rating for his right wrist ulnar nerve neuropathy from 10 percent to 0 percent, effective November 10, 2014. 2. The competent and probative evidence does not demonstrate that the Veteran experienced improvement in the ordinary conditions of life, and the RO failed to make those findings in its decision to reduce the Veteran's rating. CONCLUSION OF LAW The rating reduction for right wrist ulnar nerve neuropathy, from 10 percent disabling to 0 percent disabling, effective November 10, 2014, was not proper. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.105, 3.344 REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from September 1985 to June 1986. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a rating decision issued in November 2014 by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran appeared for a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in March 2021. A transcript of the hearing is of record. 1. Restoration for the 10 percent rating for ulnar nerve neuropathy of the right wrist The Veteran asserts that he is entitled to restoration of a 10 percent disability rating for his right wrist disability. The reduction of a rating has certain procedural requirements that must be followed by the RO if the lower evaluation results in a reduction or discontinuance of compensation payments being made. 38 C.F.R. § 3.105(e). Here, a rating action proposing such reduction was not warranted because the rating reduction did not result in a reduction or discontinuance of current compensation payments. The Veteran has not alleged otherwise. 38 C.F.R. § 3.105(e). Reducing a rating also brings concurrent substantive requirements that must be followed. When a disability rating has been in effect less than five years, a rating reduction is warranted where reexamination of the disability discloses improvement of that disability. 38 C.F.R. § 3.344(c). In making this determination, VA is required to comply with several regulations applicable to all rating-reduction cases, regardless of the rating level or the length of time that the rating has been in effect. 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.1, 4.2, 4.10, 4.13; see Brown v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 413, 420 (1993). The Board notes that for ratings in effect for five years or more, there are other specific requirements that must be met before VA can reduce a disability rating. 38 C.F.R. § 3.344(a), (b); see 38 C.F.R. § 3.343. The regulations impose a clear requirement that rating reductions be based upon review of the entire history of the Veteran's disability. Schafrath v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 589, 594 (1991). Such review requires VA to ascertain whether the evidence reflects an actual change in the disability and whether the examination reports reflecting such change are based upon thorough examinations. Thus, in any rating reduction case it not only must be determined whether an improvement in disability occurred but whether it actually reflects an improvement in the Veteran's ability to function under the ordinary conditions of life and work. Faust v. West, 13 Vet. App. 342, 350 (2000). Moreover, though a rating reduction must have been supported by the evidence on file at the time of the reduction, pertinent post-reduction evidence favorable to restoring the rating also must be considered. Dofflemyer v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 277 (1992). In March 2021, the Veteran appeared for a hearing before the Board. During the hearing, the Veteran testified that his right wrist disability has progressively gotten worse over time. He stated that his wrist disability affected his mental health because he was not sure if he was going to be able to provide for his family due to his limitations. Additionally, he decided to leave his place of employment at the Department of Corrections because he was unable to perform important tasks due to his right wrist disability. The Veteran underwent a VA examination in September 2009. The Veteran was diagnosed with ulnar compression neuropathy that causes neurogenic pain in addition to pain from degenerative changes, with impairment of sensation on the ulnar side of the right hand. It was noted that pain extended to the right forearm. The RO assigned the Veteran a 10 percent rating due to mild incomplete paralysis of the finger and wrist. The Veteran underwent another VA examination in November 2014. The Veteran reported that symptoms of severe right hand pain which is aggravated by heavy use, and his grip is reduced to about 20 percent of what it was before his in-service injury. The examiner determined that the Veteran did not have right wrist ulnar nerve neuropathy. Instead, the examiner stated that his right wrist pain was due to bone joint disease. The RO subsequently reduced the Veteran's 10 percent rating to 0 percent because he did not have a diagnosis of right wrist ulnar nerve neuropathy. The Veteran appeared for a third VA examination in September 2017. During the examination, the Veteran reported that he has been having right wrist pain since 1985. He also reported pain, tingling, and numbness down the forearm and into his hand. The examiner determined that the Veteran's median nerve and ulnar nerve were normal. In November 2017, the Veteran appeared for a fourth VA examination. He was diagnosed with right wrist ankylosis with ulnar deviation. The Veteran reported difficulty with lifting and carrying; rotating his wrist; using a computer; eating; cooking; dressing; grooming; using the bathroom; pushing and pulling; exercising; doing household chores; and difficulty performing tasks at work. Upon reviewing all of the pertinent evidence of record, the Board finds that the reduction of the 10 percent rating to a noncompensable rating was not proper. While the November 2014 examination determined that no diagnosis was present, evidence of record did not show that there was an improvement in the Veteran's ability to function under the ordinary conditions of life and work. Specifically, he continued to experience pain, tingling, numbness, and limitations on his ability to move and use his right hand. The Veteran specifically reported difficulty with lifting and carrying; writing; typing; eating; cooking; dressing; using the bathroom; pushing and pulling; exercising; and performing tasks at work (among other tasks) during his November 2017 VA examination. The nature and severity of the Veteran's symptoms and limitations have been continuous throughout the period where he was rated 10 percent to the date he received a rating reduction. Accordingly, the finding of no diagnosis of right wrist ulnar nerve neuropathy, which served as the basis for the reduction, did not actually reflect an improvement in the Veteran's ability to function under the ordinary conditions of life and work. Thus, the reduction in the rating from 10 percent to a noncompensable rating was not proper, and the 10 percent rating must be restored effective November 10, 2014. Having determined that the Veteran's disability rating warrants restoration, the Board further determines that a rating in excess of 10 percent is not warranted. At his hearing, in response to a direct question, the Veteran did not specifically state whether restoration of his rating would satisfy his appeal. The Veteran expressed concern about his disability deteriorating in the future, as well as the impact that his disability has on his mental health. The Veteran is service-connected for his depressive disorder on a secondary basis (a disability which is rated at 100 percent. Further, as a result of the restoration of the Veteran's 10 percent rating for his ulnar nerve neuropathy, the Veteran will now be entitled to Special Monthly Compensation. Finally, the Veteran remains free to file a claim for an increase for this disability, or for his underlying traumatic arthritis and scar claim that are associated with his right wrist disability in the future should such diminishment in function occur. Under the circumstances, the Board finds that the issue of entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for the Veteran's ulnar nerve neuropathy is not before the Board and need not be further discussed. Evan M. Deichert Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board C. K. Hall, 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.