Citation Nr: 18156361 Decision Date: 12/11/18 Archive Date: 12/07/18 DOCKET NO. 15-02 791 DATE: December 11, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a back disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a left knee disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a right knee disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from January 2009 to January 2013. These matters come before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2014 rating decision. The Board notes that in addition to the issues listed above the Veteran filed a notice of disagreement on the issues of service connection for a deviated septum, a jaw disability, a right shoulder disability, and a right shoulder scar. In an interim November 2014 rating decision, the RO granted service connection for a deviated septum, jaw condition, right shoulder pain, and a right shoulder scar. As this represents full grants of the benefits sought with respect to these issues, they are no longer on appeal. While the Veteran listed these issues on his January 2015 VA Form 9 Substantive Appeal, he did not indicate that he was disagreeing with the ratings assigned to such disabilities. Regarding the Veteran’s claim for a back disability, the record reflects that in an August 2014 review of a private x-ray, minimal thoracic dextroscolosis was diagnosed. The Board cannot make a fully-informed decision on the issue of service connection for a back disability because no VA examiner has opined whether his diagnosed throacic dextroscolosis is related to his in-service reports of back pain. Regarding the Veteran’s claim for a bilateral knee disability, on October 2014 VA examination, the Veteran reported bilateral knee pain, which included pain and swelling with running and walking up stairs. However, the October 2014 examiner found the Veteran did not have a currently diagnosed knee disability or limitation of range of motion. The October 2014 VA examination is inadequate because while the examiner indicated a physical examination was not necessary because the existing medical evidence was sufficient, he also indicated that he did not review the claims file and only relied on the Veteran’s verbal testimony. As noted in the Veteran’s representative’s October 2018 Appellate Brief, painful motion that causes a functional impairment may be compensated. See Saunders v. Wilkie, 886 F.3d 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2018). Here, the Veteran has alleged that his bilateral knee disabilities had a functional impact while running and walking up stairs. Accordingly, a new VA examination is necessary to determine if the Veteran’s functional impairment due to pain is related to his in-service reports of bilateral knee pain. Additionally, updated treatment records should be obtained. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. See also Bell v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 611 (1992). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain the names and addresses of all medical care providers who treated the Veteran for any back or knee complaints since service. After securing the necessary release, take all appropriate action to obtain these records, including any VA treatment. 2. After the completion of the above, schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the nature and etiology of any back or knee disabilities. Copies of all pertinent records should be made available to the examiner for review. Based on an examination, review of the record, and any tests or studies deemed necessary the examiner should provide opinions as to the following: (a.) Identify all diagnosed back disabilities since January 2013, to include thoracic dextroscolosis. (b.) For each currently diagnosed back disability, is it at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, including the Veteran’s in-service reports of back pain? (c.) Are there any diagnosed right or left knee disabilities, other than pain alone? (d.) If the answer to (c) is yes, for each diagnosed right or left knee disability, is it at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, including the Veteran’s in-service reports of bilateral knee pain? (e.) If the answer to (c) is no, does the Veteran have pain or arthralgia diagnosed in his right or left knee, does that pain impair the Veteran’s function, and if so to what extent? (f.) If the Veteran has pain diagnosed in his right or left knee that impairs his function, is it at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, including the Veteran’s in-service reports of bilateral knee pain? The examiner should consider and discuss as necessary the Veteran’s lay statements that his back and knees disabilities began during service and that he had continued symptomatology since service. MICHAEL LANE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Eric Struening, Associate Counsel