Citation Nr: 21039919 Decision Date: 07/01/21 Archive Date: 07/01/21 DOCKET NO. 14-12 592 DATE: July 1, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for hypertension is remanded. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent prior to June 7, 2014, and a rating in excess of 20 percent thereafter, for right lower extremity diabetic polyneuropathy is remanded. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent prior to June 7, 2014, and a rating in excess of 20 percent thereafter, for left lower extremity diabetic polyneuropathy is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from August 1968 to September 1974. These matters come to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2013 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Jackson, Mississippi. In his April 2014 VA Form 9, the Veteran requested a hearing before a member of the Board. A hearing was scheduled for June 2017, but he failed to report to his scheduled hearing. He was subsequently rescheduled for a Board hearing in April 2019; however, he again failed to report to his scheduled hearing; he did not show good cause for doing so and has not since requested that his hearing be rescheduled. Accordingly, the hearing request is deemed withdrawn. 38 C.F.R. § 20.704. This appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 7107(a)(2); 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c). 1. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for hypertension is remanded. A review of the record reveals that the most recent VA examination addressing the Veteran's service-connected hypertension is dated in October 2002. Although the Board acknowledges that the mere passage of time does not render an old examination inadequate, given that this examination is almost two decades old and the Veteran alleged worsening of his hypertension with his April 2012 claim for an increased rating, the Board finds that a remand is necessary to afford the Veteran a new VA examination for his hypertension to determine its current level of severity. 2. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent prior to June 7, 2014, and a rating in excess of 20 percent thereafter, for bilateral lower extremity diabetic polyneuropathy is remanded. Following the issuance of the SSOC in May 2015, a new VA examination addressing the Veteran's bilateral lower extremity diabetic polyneuropathy was obtained in March 2017 and new VA treatment records were received. The RO did not issue a SSOC after receipt of this new evidence, and the Veteran did not waive RO consideration of the new evidence. See 38 C.F.R. § 20.1304(c). The Board notes that 38 C.F.R. § 19.37 states that a SSOC will be furnished to an appellant and his representative when additional pertinent evidence is received after a previous SSOC has been issued, unless the additional evidence received duplicates evidence previously of record which was discussed in the prior SSOC. In this case, pertinent rating information was newly obtained by the RO with regard to the Veteran's claims of an increased evaluation for his bilateral lower extremity diabetic polyneuropathy and was not addressed in the last SSOC. Because the additional evidence in question in this case is neither duplicative of other evidence nor irrelevant, and because a SSOC pertaining to that evidence was not issued, this evidence must be remanded back to the AOJ. See Disabled American Veterans v. Secretary of Veterans Affairs, 327 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2003); 38 C.F.R. § 20.1304. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the current level of severity of his service-connected hypertension. The electronic claims file must be made available to the examiner for review in conjunction with the examination. The examiner should describe the severity, frequency, and duration of all symptoms associated with the Veteran's disability. 2. Furnish to the Veteran and his representative an appropriate SSOC that includes a review of all evidence received since the last SSOC, to include the above noted VA examinations and any other new evidence submitted by the Veteran while the case is at the AOJ. Thomas H. O'Shay Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Hite, 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.