Citation Nr: 18157614
Decision Date: 12/13/18	Archive Date: 12/12/18

DOCKET NO. 13-29 365
DATE:	December 13, 2018
REMANDED
Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for a left knee disability prior to March 10, 2015, and in excess of 30 percent from April 1, 2016, is remanded.
Entitlement to a rating in excess of 30 percent since June 1, 2009 for a right knee disability is remanded.
Entitlement to a total disability rating due to individual unemployability (TDIU) is remanded.
REASONS FOR REMAND
The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from November 1972 to December 1974.  This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from May 2010 and August 2014 rating decisions by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).  
The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in January 2017.
In September 2017, the Board remanded the claims on appeal for additional development.  
1. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for a left knee disability prior to March 10, 2015, and in excess of 30 percent from April 1, 2016, is remanded.
2. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 30 percent for a right knee disability since June 1, 2009 is remanded.
Remand is necessary, as the March 2018 VA-contracted examiner did not provide a retrospective opinion of the range of motion of the Veteran’s bilateral knees, as was specifically directed by the September 2017 Board remand.  An addendum opinion responsive to this deficiency should be obtained.
3. Entitlement to a TDIU is remanded.
The Veteran filed an Application for Increased Compensation based on Unemployability (VA Form 21-8940) in June 2010, wherein he asserted that he had not worked since 2007.  However, the March 2018 VA-contracted examiner noted that the Veteran was able to work part-time as a home inspector, but that he had difficulty with squatting and crawling.  Remand is necessary to develop evidence regarding any employment that the Veteran has held throughout the appeal period.
The Veteran is advised that the duty to assist is a two-way street, and that he is responsible to assist VA in developing his claims.  See Wood v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 190 (1991).  Without crucial information concerning the Veteran’s past income, and dates and reasons for unemployment, the Board may not be able to find when or if the Veteran has satisfied the requirements for a TDIU.
The matters are REMANDED for the following action:
1. Send the Veteran VA Form 21-8940 (Application for Increased Compensation Based on Unemployability), and request that he complete the same.  Advise the Veteran that he should include any employment since the termination of his federal employment in 2007, including self-employment and part-time employment.
2. Then obtain an addendum opinion from the March 2018 examiner or other suitable clinician as to the full range of motion of the Veteran’s bilateral knees during the appeal.  No additional examination of the Veteran is necessary, unless the examiner determines otherwise.  The examiner should provide an opinion as to each of the following:
A.	The Veteran’s left knee active range of motion since November 2008;
B.	The Veteran’s right knee active range of motion since June 2009;
C.	The Veteran’s left knee passive range of motion since November 2008;
D.	The Veteran’s right knee passive range of motion since June 2009;
E.	The Veteran’s left knee range of motion in weight-bearing since November 2008;
F.	The Veteran’s right knee range of motion in weight-bearing since June 2009;
G.	The Veteran’s left knee range of motion in nonweight-bearing since November 2008; and
H.	The Veteran’s right knee range of motion in nonweight-bearing since June 2009.
The examiner’s attention is invited to the reports of VA examinations conducted in June 2009, March 2014, January 2017, and March 2018, as well as VA-promulgated disability benefits questionnaires completed by the Veteran’s private physician in June 2016 and November 2016.
The claims file should be made available to and be reviewed by the examiner.
If any requested opinion cannot be provided without resorting to speculation, the examiner should so state for each such opinion and explain why an opinion would be speculative.
 
S. BUSH
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	D.M. Badaczewski, Associate Counsel