Citation Nr: 21072637 Decision Date: 12/03/21 Archive Date: 12/03/21 DOCKET NO. 14-29 890 DATE: December 3, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for left knee patellofemoral pain syndrome is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty n the United States Army June 1992 to May 2000. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2011 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO, which granted (1) service connection for left knee patellofemoral syndrome and assigned a 10 percent disability rating; (2) service connection for bilateral pes planus (also claimed as shin splints) and assigned a 10 percent disability rating; (3) service connection for right upper extremity (RUE) carpal tunnel syndrome with ulnar nerve entrapment and assigned a 10 percent disability rating; (4) service connection for left upper extremity (LUE) carpal tunnel syndrome with ulnar nerve entrapment and assigned a 10 percent disability rating, effective September 21, 2003; (5) service connection for cervical spine degenerative disc disease/degenerative joint disease (claimed as upper back pain) and assigned a 10 percent disability rating; and (6) service connection for lumbar strain (claimed as lower back pain) and assigned a 10 percent disability rating. Each claim was assigned the effective date of September 21, 2003. The Veteran submitted a notice of disagreement with this assignment in June 2012 and timely perfected his appeal in July 2014. In March 2018, the Board remanded these issues for additional evidentiary development. In January 2020, a rating decision granted (1) an increased disability rating for bilateral pes planus (also claimed as shin splints), from 10 percent to 50 percent disabling, effective June 16, 2018 and (2) an increased disability rating for lumbar strain (claimed as lower back pain), from 10 percent to 20 percent disabling, effective September 17, 2019. In October 2020, a subsequent rating decision granted: (1) an increased disability rating for bilateral pes planus (also claimed as shin splints), from 10 percent to 50 percent disabling, effective September 21, 2003; (2) an increased disability rating for RUE carpal tunnel syndrome with ulnar nerve entrapment (dominant), from 10 percent to 30 percent disabling, effective September 21, 2003; (3) an increased disability rating for LUE carpal tunnel syndrome with ulnar nerve entrapment, from 10 percent to 20 percent disabling, effective September 21, 2003; (4) service connection for left lower extremity femoral radiculopathy, assigning a 20 percent disability rating, effective September 17, 2019; (5) and service connection for right lower extremity femoral radiculopathy, assigning a 20 percent disability rating, effective September 17, 2019. In February 2021, the Board denied the Veteran's increased rating claims for bilateral pes planus, RUE carpal tunnel syndrome, LUE carpal tunnel syndrome, cervical spine degenerative disc disease, and lumbar strain. The remaining claim of entitlement to an initial disability rating for left knee patellofemoral syndrome was remanded to obtain outstanding treatment records and to obtain a new VA examination. Unfortunately, the Board finds that the VA examination provided is insufficient. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998) Although the Board sincerely regrets the additional delay, a remand is necessary to ensure that due process is followed and that there is a complete record upon which to decide the Veteran's claims, so that he is afforded every possible consideration. 38 U.S.C. § 5103A; 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. The Board cannot make a fully informed decision on the Veteran's increased rating claim, because the last VA examination, in June 2021, is inadequate and does not provide the requisite findings required under Correia v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 158 (2016). Specifically, in Correia, the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims concluded that 38 C.F.R. § 4.59 requires VA examinations, whenever possible, to include joint testing for both pain on both active and passive range of motion, as well as with weight bearing and non-weight bearing, and that if an examiner is unable to conduct the required testing or concludes that such is unnecessary, he or she should clearly explain why that is so. 28 Vet. App. 158, 168-170 (2016). Here, although the June 2021 VA examiner found that the Veteran exhibited pain in the active, passive, and weight-bearing ranges of motion in the left knee, the examiner did not record the range of motion measurements for where pain began. Accordingly, a remand is warranted for a VA examination that includes all range of motion testing, including where pain begins, in order to more accurately assess the severity of the Veteran's disability and to comply with the provisions under Correia. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule the Veteran for an updated VA examination to determine the severity of his left knee disability. The claims file, including a copy of this Remand, must be made available to and be reviewed by the examiner. All indicated testing should be accomplished and all symptomatology associated with the disabilities should be identified. The examiner should respond to the following: (a.) Test the Veteran's range of motion on active and passive motion, on weight-bearing and non-weight-bearing, if possible, and record the range of motion measurements. (b.) If there is evidence of pain on motion, the examiner must indicate the degree of range of motion at which such pain begins, and whether such pain on movement, as well as weakness, excess fatigability, or incoordination results in any loss of range of motion. If the examiner is unable to conduct the required testing or concludes that the required testing is not necessary in this case, he or she should clearly explain so in the report. (c.) The examiner must elicit information on the characteristics, severity, frequency, and duration of any flare-ups, and then estimate the extent of any additional functional loss. If such estimate cannot be provided, the examiner must indicate that he or she has considered all procurable and assembled data, and that the inability to provide an estimate results from limitations in the knowledge of the medical community at large, and not limitations of the examiner's personal knowledge. K.A. KENNERLY Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Lee Feldman, 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.