Citation Nr: 18150595
Decision Date: 11/15/18	Archive Date: 11/15/18

DOCKET NO. 16-51 266
DATE:	November 15, 2018
REMANDED
Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for residuals of fractured left heel with degenerative changes of the left ankle.
REASONS FOR REMAND
The Veteran served on active duty from July 1985 to October 1987.  This matter is on appeal from a December 2015 rating decision.
During his November 2015 VA examination, the Veteran reported that he experiences flare-ups in his left foot, specifically his ankle.  Although the examiner stated that pain, fatigue, weakness, lack of endurance, and incoordination cause functional loss during the Veteran’s flare-ups, he did not estimate range of motion loss based on the Veteran’s reported flare-ups and their impact.  For this reason, the Board finds that a remand is necessary to ensure that the Board has adequate information as to the Veteran’s reported flare-ups of her left hip.  See Sharp v. Shulkin, 29 Vet. App. 26 (2017). 
The matter is REMANDED for the following action:
1. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the nature and current severity of his service-connected left ankle disability.  The Veteran’s electronic claims file must be accessible for review by the VA examiner in conjunction with the examination.  A complete history from the Veteran should be obtained and recorded.  All testing deemed necessary by the examiner should be performed and the results reported in detail.  In particular, the examiner must test the range of motion in active motion, passive motion, weight-bearing, and non-weight-bearing.  If possible, provide these tests for the opposite joint.  If the examiner is unable to conduct any aspect of the required testing or concludes that it is not necessary, e.g., non-weight-bearing, the examiner should clearly explain why that is the case.  The rationale for all opinions expressed should be provided. 
Following the review of the claims file and examination of the Veteran, the examiner is then requested to respond to the following: 
(a)	Describe any functional limitation due to pain, weakened movement, excess fatigability, pain with use, or incoordination. 
(b)	Indicate whether the examination is taking place during a period of flare-up, and if it is not, the examiner should ask the Veteran to describe the flare-ups, including: frequency, duration, severity, and functional impairment. 
(c)	Provide an opinion estimating any additional degrees of limited motion caused by functional loss during a flare-up.  If the examiner cannot estimate the degrees of additional range of motion during flare-ups 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 or by a deficiency in the record or the examiner.
2. After completing all indicated development, the AOJ should readjudicate the Veteran’s claim.  If the benefit sought on appeal remains denied, the Veteran should be furnished with a supplemental statement of the case, given the opportunity to respond, and the case should thereafter be returned to the Board for further appellate review, if warranted.
 
KELLI A. KORDICH
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	D. Houle, Associate Counsel