BVA9504207 DOCKET NO. 93-04 329 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Waco, Texas THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to restoration of a 50 percent evaluation for peripheral neuropathy and residuals of a left wrist injury, currently evaluated as 20 percent disabling. 2. Entitlement to an increased evaluation for peripheral neuropathy of the left lower extremity, currently evaluated as 10 percent disabling. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Nadine W. Benjamin, Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from October 1974 to October 1985. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from rating decisions of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Waco, Texas. REMAND The veteran contends that his left wrist disability is more severely disabling than currently rated and that the 50 percent rating should be restored for his left wrist disability. He has complained of weakness of the left arm and poor grip strength of the left hand. It is also argued that his left lower extremity disorder is more severely disabling than the currently assigned 10 percent rating reflects. The veteran's disabilities are rated under Diagnostic Codes 8516 and 8521 of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities. The rating to be assigned under these Codes is determined by the degree of disability due to functional impairment. 38 C.F.R. Part 4, Codes 8516, 8521 (1993). The Board notes that the veteran was last examined by the VA for disability evaluation in September 1992. At that time, a neurological examination was performed, and the Board notes that the examination report contains blank areas, indicative of missing words, on the second page. The veteran was not examined by an orthopedic specialist. In a June 1992 statement to the RO, the veteran's representative reported that the veteran was to undergo a VA nerve conduction study in July 1992 and a VA consultation in August 1992. The report of the nerve conduction study is of record. A report of the August 1992 consultation, if performed, is not in the veteran's file. The VA has a statutory duty to assist the veteran in the development of facts pertinent to his claim. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991). The fulfillment of the duty to assist includes conducting a thorough and contemporaneous medical examination. Littke v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 90 (1990). That duty also includes obtaining medical records when deemed helpful. Murphy v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 78 (1990). In view of the foregoing, the case is hereby REMANDED to the RO for action as follows: 1. The RO should contact the veteran and request that he provide the names, addresses and approximate dates of treatment for all VA and non-VA health care providers who have treated him at any time since August 1992 for his residuals service-connected left upper and left lower extremities. With any necessary authorization from the veteran, the RO should attempt to obtain copies of pertinent treatment records identified by the veteran which are not currently of record, including the report of neurological consultation performed by the VA in August 1992. 2. The RO should request that the examiner who examined the veteran in September 1992 review the examination report and insert any words which were omitted from the report. 3. Thereafter, the RO should schedule the veteran for a complete neurology examination by a board certified neurologist, if available, to evaluate his disorders. The examination should be conducted in accordance with the Physician's Guide for Disability Evaluation Examinations, and the claims folder should be made available to the examiner for review prior to the examination. All manifestations of the veteran's disabilities should be described in detail, and any appropriate tests should be performed. The examiner should provide an opinion concerning the degree of functional impairment shown. A complete rationale should be given for all opinions and conclusions expressed. 4. Thereafter, the veteran should schedule the veteran for a complete orthopedic examination by a board certified orthopedist, if available to evaluate the veteran's service-connected disorders. The examination should be conducted in accordance with the Physician's Guide for Disability Evaluation Examinations, and the claims folder should be made available to the examiner for review prior to the examination. All manifestations of the veteran's disabilities should be described in detail, and any appropriate tests should be performed. The examiner should provide an opinion concerning the degree of functional impairment shown. A complete rationale should be given for all opinions and conclusions expressed. 5. The RO should review the examination reports and determine if they are in compliance with this remand. If not, they should be returned for corrective action. 6. Then, the RO should undertake any other indicated development and readjudicate the claims for service connection for entitlement to restoration of a 50 percent evaluation for peripheral neuropathy and residuals of a left wrist injury, and for entitlement to an increased evaluation for peripheral neuropathy of the left lower extremity. If the benefits sought on appeal are not granted to the satisfaction of the veteran, a Supplemental Statement of the Case should be issued for all issues in appellate status, and the veteran and his representative provided an opportunity to respond. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board for further consideration, if otherwise in order. By this REMAND, the Board intimates no opinion as to any final outcome warranted. No action is required of the veteran until he is notified by the RO. F. JUDGE FLOWERS Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals The Board of Veterans' Appeals Administrative Procedures Improvement Act, Pub. L. No. 103-271, § 6, 108 Stat. 740, ___ (1994), permits a proceeding instituted before the Board to be assigned to an individual member of the Board for a determination. This proceeding has been assigned to an individual member of the Board. Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 1991), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Veterans Appeals. 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) (1994).