Citation Nr: 21014393 Decision Date: 03/12/21 Archive Date: 03/12/21 DOCKET NO. 18-27 033 DATE: March 12, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a left knee disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a right knee disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a low back disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a left wrist disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a right wrist disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active duty from November 2001 to May 2002, November 2004 to November 2005, and July 2008 to August 2009. This case comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal of a January 2018 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In February 2021, the Veteran testified at a video conference hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ). A transcript of that proceeding has not yet been associated with the record. However, this case is being remanded as part of the Board’s One Touch program. As such, the Board finds no prejudice will result from the adjudication of her claim in this Board decision. 1. Entitlement to service connection for a left knee disability is remanded. 2. Entitlement to service connection for a right knee disability is remanded. 3. Entitlement to service connection for a low back disability is remanded. 4. Entitlement to service connection for a left wrist disability is remanded. 5. Entitlement to service connection for a right wrist disability is remanded. The Veteran believes her left knee, right knee, low back, left wrist and right wrist disabilities are due to her military service. The Veteran served in motor transport in Kuwait and Iraq and received imminent danger pay while she was serving in those areas. The record shows that the October 2009 Post-Deployment Health Re-Assessment noted slight pain in right wrist. The Veteran’s personnel records show a line of duty document showing a knee injury during active duty. The record did not indicate which knee was injured. In addition, the Veteran drove heavy machinery during service. Her primary specialty was motor transport. During her PTSD examination, she reported hitting a civilian car once while driving a truck. The Board finds that examinations are needed to determine whether the Veteran’s claimed disabilities are related to her military service. McClendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Attempt to confirm current mailing address. 2. Obtain the Veteran’s VA treatment records for the period from 2000 to the Present. All records/responses received must be associated with electronic claims file. 3. Ask the Veteran to complete a VA Form 21-4142 for any private medical treatment facilities that treated her for the above disabilities. Make two requests for the authorized records from these facilities, unless it is clear after the first request that a second request would be futile. 4. Schedule the below VA examinations for the Veteran at the VA Long Beach Healthcare System in Long Beach, California. 5. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination for her right knee, left knee, low back, left wrist and right wrist disabilities. The examiner must review the claims file. If a diagnosis cannot be provided but the Veteran’s condition manifests in symptoms that cause functional impairment, then the examiner should consider them a “disability” for the purpose of providing the requested opinions below. The examiner is asked to provide a response to the following: Is right knee, left knee, low back, left wrist and right wrist disabilities at least as likely as not related to service? Provide a rationale to support the opinion(s). The examiner’s attention is directed to the October 2009 Post-Deployment Health Re-Assessment which noted slight pain in right wrist. The examiner’s attention is directed to the line of duty determination noting that the Veteran was running up a hill, slipped and hit her knee on a rock. The Veteran drove heavy machinery during service. Her primary specialty was motor transport. She reported during PTSD examinations that she hit a civilian car once while driving a truck. 6. Readjudicate the Veteran’s claims, with application of all appropriate laws, regulations, and case law, and consideration of any additional information obtained as a result of this remand. If the decision remains adverse to the Veteran, he and her agent should be furnished a supplemental statement of the case and afforded an appropriate period of time within which to respond thereto. KRISTI L. GUNN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Tahirih S. Samadani, 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.