Citation Nr: 21063476 Decision Date: 10/14/21 Archive Date: 10/14/21 DOCKET NO. 18-35 775 DATE: October 14, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a rating in excess of 30 percent disabling for service-connected migraines is remanded. Entitlement to a compensable rating for service-connected bilateral pes planus is remanded. Entitlement to a compensable rating for service-connected patellofemoral pain syndrome of the left knee is remanded. Entitlement to a compensable rating for service-connected patellofemoral pain syndrome of the right knee is remanded. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent disabling for service-connected lower back disability is remanded. Entitlement to a compensable rating for service-connected seborrheic dermatitis, tinea pedis, and plantar wart is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from May 2009 to October 2014. The Veteran testified before the undersigned at an October 2021 Board Hearing. The transcript from the hearing has not yet been associated with the file, as the case is being remanded under the Board's "One Touch" program. The hearing transcript will still be processed and associated with the claims file in the ordinary course of business. The most recent VA treatment records associated with the claims file are from May 2019, but the Veteran indicated at his October 2021 Board Hearing that he continues to receive treatment from VA facilities. Any VA treatment records are within VA's constructive possession, and are considered potentially relevant to all of the issues on appeal. A remand of the entire appeal is required to allow VA to obtain outstanding VA treatment records. Remand for updated examinations is also necessary. The most recent VA examination with respect to migraine headaches is from May 2018. His most recent VA examinations with respect to all of the other claimed disabilities are from December 2014. The Veteran's testimony at the October 2021 Board Hearing raised the issue of a worsening of his service-connected disabilities and the need for updated examinations to evaluate their current severity. See Proscelle v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 629, 632 (1992) (holding that, where the veteran claims a disability is worse than when originally rated and the evidence is too old to adequately evaluate the current state of the condition, the VA must provide a new examination). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain the Veteran's VA treatment records for the period from May 2019 to the Present. 2. Schedule the Veteran for an examination to determine the current severity of his service-connected migraines. The examiner should provide a full description of the disability and report all signs and symptoms necessary for evaluating the Veteran's disability under the rating criteria. 3. Schedule the Veteran for an examination to determine the current severity of his service-connected low back disability, to include appropriate examination to evaluate any associated radiculopathy, if present. The examiner should provide a full description of the disability and report all signs and symptoms necessary for evaluating the Veteran's disability under the rating criteria. In so doing, the examiner must test the Veteran's active motion, passive motion, and pain with weight-bearing and without weight-bearing. 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). The examiner must also attempt to elicit information regarding the severity, frequency, and duration of any flare-ups, and the degree of functional loss during flare-ups. If it is not possible to provide a specific measurement based on direct observation, the examiner should provide an estimate, if at all possible, of the additional impairment due to flare-ups based on the other evidence of record and the Veteran's statements. 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). 4. Schedule the Veteran for an examination to determine the current severity of his service-connected left and right knee disabilities, to include appropriate examination to evaluate any associated instability, if present. 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. In so doing, the examiner must test the Veteran's active motion, passive motion, and pain with weight-bearing and without weight-bearing. 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). The examiner must also attempt to elicit information regarding the severity, frequency, and duration of any flare-ups, and the degree of functional loss during flare-ups. If it is not possible to provide a specific measurement based on direct observation, the examiner should provide an estimate, if at all possible, of the additional impairment due to flare-ups based on the other evidence of record and the Veteran's statements. 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. Schedule the Veteran for an examination to determine the current severity of his service-connected bilateral pes planus. The examiner should provide a full description of the disability and report all signs and symptoms necessary for evaluating the Veteran's disability under the rating criteria. In so doing, 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. If it is not possible to provide a specific measurement based on direct observation, the examiner should provide an estimate, if at all possible, of the additional impairment due to flare-ups based on the other evidence of record and the Veteran's statements. 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). 6. Schedule the Veteran for an examination to determine the current severity of his service-connected seborrheic dermatitis, tinea pedis, and plantar wart. The examiner should provide a full description of the disability and report all signs and symptoms necessary for evaluating the Veteran's disability under the rating criteria. In so doing, the examiner must attempt to elicit information regarding the severity, frequency, and duration of any flare-ups. If it is not possible to provide a specific measurement based on direct observation, the examiner should provide an estimate, if at all possible, of the additional impairment (or exposed and non-exposed areas involved) due to flare-ups based on the other evidence of record and the Veteran's statements. 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). MICHELLE L. KANE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Kerry Hubers 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.