Citation Nr: 0000414 Decision Date: 01/06/00 Archive Date: 01/11/00 DOCKET NO. 93-16 612A ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in San Juan, Puerto Rico THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to an increased disability rating for right carpal tunnel syndrome, currently rated as 30 percent disabling. 2. Entitlement to an increased disability rating for left carpal tunnel syndrome, currently rated as 20 percent disabling. 3. Entitlement to an increased (compensable) disability rating for the residuals of a left ankle injury. 4. Entitlement to an increased (compensable) disability rating for a scar of the right hand. WITNESSES AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant and his employer ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD T. Reichelderfer INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from May 1988 to January 1992. He also had prior active and reserve service. This appeal arises from a rating decision of December 1992 from the San Juan, Puerto Rico, Regional Office (RO). REMAND The veteran received a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) examination in August 1994 to assess his carpal tunnel syndrome. Earlier that month, he had undergone a left ulnar nerve release. The veteran has not received a VA examination of his carpal tunnel syndrome since 1994 to assess the current level of disability or to assess the residuals of the ulnar nerve release. Since approximately five years have elapsed since the veteran's carpal tunnel syndrome was evaluated, additional examination of the veteran is necessary to obtain current findings related to the carpal tunnel syndrome. Additionally, the veteran's left ankle disability and hand scar were last evaluated in March 1992. Since almost eight years have elapsed since the ankle and scar were evaluated, additional examination of the veteran is necessary to assess the present status of these disabilities. Therefore, this case must be returned to the RO for further examination of the veteran. October 1995 memoranda indicate that the veteran failed to report for VA examinations. However, the record does not show whether he received timely notice at the correct address to report for the examinations. Additionally, he was not notified that he failed to report for the scheduled examinations until the October 1999 supplemental statement of the case was sent him four years later. The supplemental statement of the case also did not notify him of the consequences of failing to report for his examinations. Accordingly, while additional examination of the veteran may have been scheduled, the claims file does not show that he was properly notified of the examinations nor does it show that he received timely notification of the consequences of not reporting for the examination. Therefore, as noted above, further examination of the veteran is necessary. The U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) has held that the duty to assist veterans in the development of facts pertinent to their claims, under 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991) and 38 C.F.R. § 3.103(a) (1999), as set forth in Littke v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 90 (1990), requires that the VA accomplish additional development of the evidence if the record currently before it is inadequate. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following: 1. The RO should request that the veteran be properly scheduled for a VA examination to assess the right and left carpal tunnel syndrome, and the left ulnar nerve entrapment. All appropriate tests and studies should be conducted, including nerve conduction studies if indicated. The examiner should be requested to fully describe the symptoms and severity of the carpal tunnel syndrome in both wrists and the left ulnar nerve entrapment. The examiner should present all findings, and the reasons and bases therefor, in a clear, comprehensive, and legible manner on the examination report. The claims folder should be made available to the examiner for review prior to evaluation of the veteran. 2. The RO should request that the veteran be properly scheduled for a VA examination of the left ankle. All appropriate tests and studies should be conducted. The examiner should be requested to fully describe the symptoms and severity of the veteran's left ankle disability, including range of motion testing and assessments of pain on motion. The examiner should present all findings, and the reasons and bases therefor, in a clear, comprehensive, and legible manner on the examination report. The claims folder should be made available to the examiner for review prior to evaluation of the veteran. 3. The RO should request that the veteran be properly scheduled for a VA examination to assess his right hand scar. Any appropriate tests and studies should be conducted. The examiner should be requested to fully describe the right hand scar. The examiner should present all findings, and the reasons and bases therefor, in a clear, comprehensive, and legible manner on the examination report. The claims folder should be made available to the examiner for review prior to evaluation of the veteran. 4. Following completion of the above, the RO should review the veteran's claims and determine whether increased disability ratings for the right and left carpal tunnel syndrome, the residuals of the left ankle injury, and the right hand scar can be granted. If the veteran fails to report for the examinations, the RO should ensure that he received timely notification of the examinations at the correct address, and documentation of the notification should be associated with the claims file. He should also be advised of the consequences of not reporting for a scheduled examination as outlined in 38 C.F.R. § 3.655 (1999). The RO should conduct any additional evidentiary development that is deemed necessary. If a decision remains adverse to the veteran, he should be provided with a supplemental statement of the case and be apprised of the applicable period of time within which to respond. The case should then be returned to the Board for further consideration, as appropriate. The Board intimates no opinion as to the outcome of this case. The veteran need take no action until so informed. The purposes of this REMAND are to obtain additional evidence and to ensure compliance with due process considerations. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded to the regional office. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment by the RO. 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 The Veterans' Benefits Improvements Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-446, § 302, 108 Stat. 4645, 4658 (1994), 38 U.S.C.A. § 5101 (West Supp. 1999) (Historical and Statutory Notes). In addition, VBA's Adjudication Procedure Manual, M21-1, Part IV, directs the ROs to provide expeditious handling of all cases that have been remanded by the Board and the Court. See M21-1, Part IV, paras. 8.44- 8.45 and 38.02-38.03. JACK W. BLASINGAME Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals (CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE) Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 1991 & Supp. 1999), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (1999).