Citation Nr: 21008906 Decision Date: 02/18/21 Archive Date: 02/18/21 DOCKET NO. 12-23 260 DATE: February 18, 2021 REMANDED 1. Service connection for a right knee disorder. 2. Service connection for a neck disorder. 3. Service connection for a back disorder.   REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from July 1978 to July 1982. The case is on appeal from a May 2010 rating decision. In November 2020, the Veteran testified at a Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ). The Board notes that the Veteran provided testimony in regard to additional claims not addressed herein at the November 2020 Board hearing. The additional claims are the subject of a separate decision by a three-VLJ panel that includes the hearing VLJ from a March 2018 Board hearing that addressed the additional claims. 1. Service connection for a right knee disorder. The Veteran is seeking service connection for a right knee disorder. The Veteran submitted an August 2009 letter from a private physician. The physician stated that the Veteran has had a lot of knee problems over the years. He also reported that, although he did not see direct reports of knee injuries in the Veteran’s military records, he thinks there is a possibility that the Veteran’s knee issues may be related to service. During the November 2020 Board hearing, the Veteran stated that he has a right knee condition secondary to service-connected right foot plantar wart or left knee disabilities. The Veteran’s service treatment records (STRs) do not include reports of or treatment for right knee symptoms. A July 1982 separation examination is marked as normal for the lower extremities and nothing relevant was noted or reported. The Veteran’s private treatment records include reports of right knee symptoms. In July 2006, the Veteran reported right knee pain for a few months and injuring his right knee in April or May. He also reported experiencing intermittent locking, swelling, and instability. In October 2006, the Veteran reported left knee pain flaring for 11 days and that his right knee hurts due to increased weight load on that side. In February 2008, he reported chronic left knee pain with recent right knee pain. The treatment provider reported good right knee range of motion and denied the presence of effusion. In March 2009, the Veteran reported a flareup of right knee pain. The treatment provider reported effusion with crepitus and pain on flexion. In January 2020, the Veteran was afforded an examination in regard to his left knee pursuant to the June 2018 Board remand. The examiner reported reduced right knee range of motion resulting in functional loss and crepitus. However, the examiner did not report a right knee diagnosis or provide a nexus opinion. On remand, the Veteran should be afforded an examination to determine the nature and etiology of the current right knee disorders. See McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79, 81 (2006). 2. Service connection for a neck disorder. 3. Service connection for a back disorder. In a May 2010 rating decision, the RO denied service connection for back and neck disorders. Thereafter, in a February 2011 rating decision, the RO confirmed and continued the denials. The Veteran filed a timely NOD for these claims in April 2011. However, a statement of the case (SOC) has not been issued with regard to these claims. Accordingly, the Board finds that remand of the claims for issuance of an SOC is necessary. See 38 C.F.R. § 20.904(c); Manlincon v. West, 12 Vet. App. 238, 240-41 (1999). These claims are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Prepare an SOC in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 19.26 regarding the issues of service connection for back and neck disorders. This action is required unless the matters are resolved by granting the benefits sought by the Veteran in full or by the Veteran’s withdrawal of the NOD. If, and only if, the Veteran files a timely substantive appeal should the issue be returned to the Board. 2. Schedule the Veteran for an examination (or telehealth interview, review of the record, etc. if an in-person examination is not feasible) by an appropriate medical professional to determine the nature and etiology of all right knee disorders. The entire claims file should be reviewed by the examiner. Thereafter, the examiner is asked to: (a.) Identify all right knee disorders present since September 2009. (b.) State whether it is at least as likely as not that each disorder had its onset during service or is otherwise related to an in-service event, disease, or injury. (c.) State whether it is at least as likely as not that each disorder is caused or aggravated by a right foot plantar wart, to include alteration of standing and walking. (d.) State whether it is at least as likely as not that each disorder is caused or aggravated by left knee osteoarthritis, to include alteration of standing and walking. (Continued on the next page)   Aggravation means an increase in severity beyond the natural progress of the disease. A rationale should be provided for opinions offered. RYAN T. KESSEL Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Jimerfield 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.