Citation Nr: 20054701 Decision Date: 08/18/20 Archive Date: 08/18/20 DOCKET NO. 18-06 526 DATE: August 18, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 20 percent for a lumbar spine disability, effective March 24, 2016, is remanded. Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 10 percent for limitation of extension of the right hip, effective March 24, 2016, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from April 1987 to November 1990. In an April 2019 decision, the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board), in pertinent part, denied entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 20 percent for a lumbar spine disability and a disability rating in excess of 10 percent for limitation of extension of the right hip. The Veteran appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court), and in a March 2020 order, the Court granted the parties’ Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMPR), vacated the Board’s decision as it pertained to the increased rating claims for a lumbar spine disability and limitation of extension of the right hip, and remanded the matter back to the Board for adjudication consistent with the JMPR. The claims of entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 20 percent for a lumbar spine disability and a disability rating in excess of 10 percent for limitation of extension of the right hip are remanded. While the Veteran underwent VA examinations for his lumbar spine and right hip in April 2017, these examinations did not comply with the requirements set forth in Correia v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 158, 168 (2016) and Sharp v. Shulkin, 29 Vet. App. 26, 34-36 (2017). The examinations mentioned the Veteran’s reports of pain on weight-bearing and non-weight-bearing and in active and passive range of motion, but did not contain specific findings about his functional ability for each type of motion. Similarly, the examinations did not contain specific findings as to any additional functional loss suffered during flare-ups or after repetitive use. The examiner improperly stated that an opinion concerning pain during flare-ups or after repetitive use would be speculative solely because the Veteran was not being examined during a flare-up or after repetitive use. See Jones v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 382, 390 (2010). The examiner did not indicate that the speculation was due to lack of knowledge within the medical community. The matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Obtain the Veteran’s VA treatment records for the period from August 2017 to present. 2. Obtain the Veteran’s treatment records from Richard G. Wilson Consolidated Troop Medical Clinic in Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri, for the period from November 2017 to present. 3. Ask the Veteran to complete a VA Form 21-4142 for St. John Chiropractic Office and any other private treatment received for his lumbar spine and right hip disabilities. Make two requests for the authorized records from each facility, unless it is clear after the first request that a second request would be futile. 4. Schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the current severity of his lumbar spine and right hip disabilities. The examiner should provide a full description of the disabilities and report all signs and symptoms necessary for evaluating the Veteran’s disabilities under the rating criteria. The Board notes that due to the COVID-19 pandemic, it may be difficult to schedule VA examinations. The Veteran should be afforded the opportunity to postpone his examinations until such time as it can be scheduled. Alternatively, if appropriate, the RO may schedule a telemed examination or obtain VA medical opinion(s) only. The examiner must test the Veteran’s active motion, passive motion, and pain with weight-bearing and without weight-bearing. Additionally, the examiner must attempt to elicit information regarding the severity, frequency, and duration of any flare-ups, and the degree of functional loss during flare-ups or after repetitive use. The examiner must describe the additional functional loss in terms of range of motion during flare-ups or after repetitive use. If the examination is not conducted during a flare-up or after repetitive use, the examiner must estimate the additional functional loss based on the medical evidence and the Veteran’s statements, to include the level of pain on good and bad days and the effects of standing and sitting for long periods of time. If it is not possible to provide a specific measurement without speculation, the examiner must state whether the need to speculate is due to a deficiency in the state of general medical knowledge (no one could respond given medical science and the known facts), a deficiency in the record (additional facts are required), or the examiner does not have the knowledge or training. 5. After completing the above, and any other development as may be indicated, the Veteran’s claims should be readjudicated based on the entirety of the evidence. If the claims remain denied, the Veteran and his representative should be issued a supplemental statement of the case. An appropriate period of time should be allowed for response. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration, if otherwise in order. K. Parakkal Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Craig Ormson, 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.