Citation Nr: 21006091 Decision Date: 02/03/21 Archive Date: 02/03/21 DOCKET NO. 15-42 149 DATE: February 3, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for cervical strain is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for lumbar strain is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for patellofemoral syndrome, left knee, is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for patellofemoral syndrome, right knee, is remanded. Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for medial tibial stress syndrome, left leg, is remanded. Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for medial tibial stress syndrome, right leg, is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral eye condition is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a left hand disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a right hip disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a right thigh disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a left ankle disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a right ankle disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a left foot disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a right foot disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a disability of the toes of the left foot is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a disability of the toes of the right foot is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND These matters were previously before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) in June 2019, when they were remanded for further development. The Agency of Original Jurisdiction issued a post-remand supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) to the Veteran in July 2020. The Board notes updated VA treatment records were associated with the Veteran’s claim file on October 29, 2020. These records were not considered in the AOJ’s July 2020 SSOC. Since these records were received prior to transfer of the appellate record to the Board on October 30, 2020, VA regulation requires a remand of the issues on appeal so the AOJ can issue an updated SSOC. See 38 C.F.R. § 19.37(a). Further, the Board’s June 2019 remand directives specifically directed the AOJ to ensure examinations scheduled for the Veteran’s service-connected cervical spine, lumbar spine, left knee, right knee, left leg, and right leg include range of motion testing in in both active and passive motion and in weight-bearing and nonweight-bearing in accordance with the holding in Correia v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 158 (2016). Yet, the Veteran’s December 2019 VA examination reports do not include findings in compliance with Correia. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule the Veteran for new examinations to assess the severity of his service-connected cervical strain, lumbar strain, bilateral patellofemoral syndrome, and bilateral medial tibial stress syndrome. The selected examiner should conduct all indicated tests and studies, to include range of motion testing. The joints in question should be tested in both active and passive motion and in weight-bearing and nonweight-bearing. 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 why that is so. If any of the examination reports does not include findings consistent with Correia v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 158 (2016), the report must be returned to the examiner as incomplete. The examiner should describe any pain, weakened movement, excess fatigability, instability of station and incoordination present. The examiner should also state whether the examination is taking place during a period of flare-up. If not, the examiner should ask the Veteran to describe the flare-ups he experiences, including: frequency, duration, characteristics, precipitating and alleviating factors, severity and/or extent of functional impairment he experiences during a flare-up of symptoms and/or after repeated use over time. Based on the Veteran’s lay statements and the other evidence of record, the examiner should provide an opinion estimating any additional degrees of limited motion caused by functional loss during a flare-up or after repeated use over time. If the examiner cannot estimate the degrees of additional range of motion loss during flare-ups or after repetitive use without resorting to speculation, the examiner should state whether the need to speculate is caused by a deficiency in the state of general medical knowledge (i.e. no one could respond given medical science and the known facts) or by a deficiency in the record or the examiner (i.e. additional facts are required, or the examiner does not have the needed knowledge or training). 2. Review the evidence associated with the claims file since the issuance of the July 2020 SSOC, to include, but not limited to, the updated VA treatment records associated with the claims file on October 29, 2020, and then issue an updated SSOC if any benefit sought on appeal remains denied. M. HYLAND Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board L. S. Kyle, 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.