Citation Nr: 22016558 Decision Date: 03/22/22 Archive Date: 03/22/22 DOCKET NO. 16-61 268 DATE: March 22, 2022 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a right knee 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. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from October 2011 to February 2015. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2015 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). On his December 2016 VA Form 9, the Veteran requested a Travel Board hearing before a member of the Board. In a letter dated February 24, 2020, VA notified the Veteran that he was scheduled for a Travel Board hearing before a member of the Board on April 21, 2020. In this regard, the Board observes that, in November 2020, the Veteran was sent a letter indicating that he had elected an in-person hearing with a Veterans Law Judge and, in light of COVID 19, was encouraged to opt into a virtual hearing. In a letter dated August 22, 2021, VA notified the Veteran that he was scheduled for a virtual hearing before a member of the Board on October 6, 2021. The notices were mailed to the Veteran's last known address of record. They were not returned as undeliverable by the postal service. The Veteran failed to report for this scheduled hearing without good cause. VA has received no communication, written or otherwise, from the Veteran pertaining to the hearing. Because the Veteran has failed to appear for his scheduled hearing without good cause and there has been no request for postponement, his request for a hearing will therefore be considered withdrawn. 38 C.F.R. § 20.704(d). 1. Entitlement to service connection for a right knee disability is remanded. 2. Entitlement to service connection for a left foot disability is remanded. 3. Entitlement to service connection for a right foot disability is remanded. The Veteran states that he experiences right knee pain and bilateral foot pain. He also states that he experienced this type of pain during service while deployed and carried excess weight during foot patrols and duty in the guard tower. As pain alone may be considered a disability where it causes functional loss, Saunders v. Wilkie, 886 F.3d 1356 (2018), there is an indication that a current right knee and bilateral foot disability may be related to service. An examination is therefore necessary to fulfill VA's duty to assist the Veteran in developing his claim for service connection for pes planus. See McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79, 83 (2006) (VA is obliged to provide an examination where there is insufficient information to decide the claim and there is an indication the current disability may be associated with service). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule the Veteran for an examination with an appropriate clinician to determine whether any current right knee disability is related to the Veteran's military service. The claims file must be made available to and be reviewed by the examiner in conjunction with the examination. Following review of the claims file and examination of the Veteran, the examiner should identify all right knee disabilities currently found. The examiner should be instructed that pain can be considered a disability where it causes functional impairment, even in the absence of an underlying diagnosis. Saunders v. Wilkie, 886 F.3d 1356 (2018). For each right knee disability identified, the examiner should opine whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the disability began in or is otherwise caused by the Veteran's active service. If no current right knee disability is diagnosed, the examiner must opine whether it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran's current complaints of right knee pain result in functional impairment. If the right knee pain does cause functional impairment, the examiner must opine whether it is at least as likely as not that the right knee pain is related to the Veteran's military service. The examiner should address the Veteran's lay statements regarding continuity of symptomatology since onset and/or since discharge from service. The examiner should address any other pertinent evidence of record. All findings must be reported in detail and all opinions must be accompanied by a clear rationale. If any of the above issues cannot be resolved without resorting to speculation, then a detailed medical explanation as to why this is so must be provided 2. Schedule the Veteran for an examination with an appropriate clinician to determine whether any current bilateral foot disability is related to the Veteran's military service. The claims file must be made available to and be reviewed by the examiner in conjunction with the examination. Following review of the claims file and examination of the Veteran, the examiner should identify all foot disabilities currently found. The examiner should be instructed that pain can be considered a disability where it causes functional impairment, even in the absence of an underlying diagnosis. Saunders v. Wilkie, 886 F.3d 1356 (2018). For each foot disability identified, the examiner should opine whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the disability began in or is otherwise caused by the Veteran's active service. If no current foot disability is diagnosed, the examiner must opine whether it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran's current complaints of foot pain result in functional impairment. If the foot pain does cause functional impairment, the examiner must opine whether it is at least as likely as not that the foot pain is related to the Veteran's military service. The examiner should address the Veteran's lay statements regarding continuity of symptomatology since onset and/or since discharge from service. The examiner should address any other pertinent evidence of record. All findings must be reported in detail and all opinions must be accompanied by a clear rationale. If any of the above issues cannot be resolved without resorting to speculation, then a detailed medical explanation as to why this is so must be provided. MARJORIE A. AUER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Gastoukian, Kelly 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.