REMAND
The severity of the Veteran's bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy has not been recently evaluated, and as that is the prime concern for claims in an increase in rating, a new examination is necessary. Also, outstanding records, to include any records held in federal custody, are to be obtained. Other directives are as below.
Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action:
(Please note, this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c). Expedited handling is requested.)
1. Obtain all outstanding VA treatment reports for the Veteran and associate copies with the claims file. In addition to all treatment records, vocational rehabilitation records, if present, must be obtained and associated with the claims file. In addition, contact the Social Security Administration (SSA) and determine as to if a claim for disability benefits has been filed with that agency. If SSA records do exist, obtain copies and associate them with the claims file.
2. As the Veteran has applied for disability benefits administered by the State of California, contact the appropriate state agency and obtain any records associated with a disability determination by that agency. If no records are found to exist after an exhaustive search, so annotate the claims file.
3. Schedule the Veteran for a comprehensive neurological examination of the bilateral lower extremities to determine the severity and, if possible, the onset date, of current bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy.
The examiner's attention is called to the following:
*The examiner should determine current neurological deficits associated with service-connected bilateral radiculopathy in the lower extremities. Impairments with respect to strength, muscle tone, and propulsion should be specifically described.
*Range of motion testing of the lower extremities should occur, and if radiculopathy is productive of impairment, the degree to which such decrease in motion exists should be reported.
*The Veteran is now in receipt of service-connected compensation benefits for his bilateral hips. VA clinical records, dating to 2011, note that radiculopathy AND hip disablement exist as comorbid conditions.
*The Veteran has credibly reported pain in the hip and lower extremity regions for many years; however, there is some conflict in the record as to when radiculopathy had an onset. Specifically, a February 2011 VA clinical report listed the radiation of pain from the lower back into the lower extremities, and a later November 2011 examination report failed to diagnose radiculopathy (earlier March and October 2010 physical examinations also do not indicate the presence of radiculopathy). Nonetheless, the Veteran has credibly reported pain in the lower extremities for many years, and, to the extent possible, the degree of pain associated with radiculopathy and with service-connected hip arthritis should be described.
*Specifically, it is noted that the claim for entitlement to service connection for radiculopathy has been deemed to originate in September 2004 (date of claim). To the extent it is medically possible, the neurologist is asked to note the Veteran's complaints of pain, in addition to the conflicting medical evidence, and offer an opinion as to whether bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy has been present since the date of claim in 2004. If not, the approximate date of onset should be expressly described.
ALL CONCLUSIONS MUST BE SUPPORTED BY APPROPRIATE MEDICAL EXPLANATION. THE LACK OF DOCUMENTATION IN CONTEMPORANEOUS MEDICAL RECORDS IS NOT, IN ITSELF, A SUFFICIENT BASIS ON WHICH TO REST AN OPINION.
4. Following the above-directed development, re-adjudicate the Veteran's claims for an increase and earlier effective dates. The RO's attention is called to the potential applicability of 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(c). If the claims remain denied, issue an appropriate supplemental statement of the case and forward the claims to the Board for adjudication.
The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999).
This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner. See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West 2014).
Question
paulcolrain
this is what the judge put in remand back to AOJ:
this is what the SSOC STATES:
beneath is the link to the SSOC please click
3152
Edited by paulcolrainsomething isnt right
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
9
6
2
1
Popular Days
Apr 15
11
Apr 14
8
Apr 13
1
Apr 17
1
Top Posters For This Question
paulcolrain 9 posts
Buck52 6 posts
Gastone 2 posts
vetquest 1 post
Popular Days
Apr 15 2018
11 posts
Apr 14 2018
8 posts
Apr 13 2018
1 post
Apr 17 2018
1 post
Popular Posts
Gastone
PC, a somewhat difficult read, however; the Remand was very interesting educational. Whatever did you use to attach the SSOC, a real pain.? Pdf's are much easier to open and read. The Medical Evi
20 answers to this question
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now