Citation Nr: 1007017 Decision Date: 02/25/10 Archive Date: 03/05/10 DOCKET NO. 08-28 817 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St. Petersburg, Florida THE ISSUE Entitlement to an increased rating for a left knee disability. ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD A. Cryan, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from March 1961 to June 1964 and from August 1965 to May 1982. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2007 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in St. Petersburg, Florida. The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center in Washington, D.C. REMAND The Board finds that additional development is necessary before a decision on the merits of the claim can be reached. The Veteran submitted a statement in March 2008 and indicated that he had ongoing treatment for his left knee at the West Palm Beach VA Medical Center (VAMC). Associated with the claims file are VA outpatient treatment reports dated through July 2006. Because there may be outstanding VA medical records that contain information pertinent to the Veteran's claim, an attempt to obtain such records should be made. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(2) (2009); Bell v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 611 (1992). Associated with the claims file is a request for disability records from the Social Security Administration (SSA) dated in February 2008. A notation on the request indicates that the VA and SSA communication was down and it was not determined whether the Veteran was in receipt of SSA benefits. A response from the SSA received at the RO later in February 2008 indicates that the initial request had been forwarded to the appropriate office. However, no records from the SSA have been associated with the claims file and no further information was received from the SSA. The Veteran was afforded a VA examination in January 2007. He indicated that his left knee disability was manifested by giving way, instability, weakness, and locking. The Veteran denied episodes of dislocation and subluxation. The examiner did not provide any objective findings related to instability or subluxation. The Veteran was also afforded a VA examination in April 2007 at which time he again reported giving way, instability, and weakness. He denied weakness, episodes of dislocation and subluxation, and locking episodes. The examiner indicated there was no objective evidence of instability but reported that there was abnormal patellar tracking, crepitus, deformity, malalignment, tenderness, painful motion, weakness, and guarding of movement. The Veteran submitted statements in March 2008 and May 2008 at which time he reported episodes of locking, instability, and subluxation, symptoms that he had previously denied. In order to ascertain the Veteran's current symptomatology, a VA orthopedic examination should be accomplished because there may have been a worsening of the Veteran's disability since the most recent examination. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain any VA outpatient treatment reports from the West Palm Beach VAMC dated after July 2006. 2. Contact the SSA and obtain medical evidence and a copy of any disability decisions pertaining to the Veteran. A response from the SSA should be sought, even if no records are available. 3. Schedule the Veteran for A VA orthopedic examination to determine the extent of his left knee disability. All necessary tests and studies, including range of motion studies, should be conducted. The examiner should specifically indicate whether the Veteran's knee is manifested by lateral instability or recurrent subluxation and whether such instability or subluxation is slight, moderate, or severe. The report must discuss any weakened movement, excess fatigability with use, incoordination, painful motion, or pain with use, and provide an opinion as to how those factors result in any limitation of function. If the Veteran describes flare-ups of pain, the examiner must offer an opinion as to whether there would be additional limits on functional ability during flare-ups. All losses of function due to problems such as pain should be equated to additional degrees of limitation of flexion and extension beyond that shown clinically. 4. Then, readjudicate the claim. If action remains adverse to the Veteran, issue a supplemental statement of the case and allow the appropriate time for response. Then, return the case to the Board. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board or the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2009). _________________________________________________ Harvey P. Roberts Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2009).