Citation Nr: 18159233
Decision Date: 12/18/18	Archive Date: 12/18/18

DOCKET NO. 17-27 565
DATE:	December 18, 2018
REMANDED
Entitlement to an increased rating in excess of 10 percent for left knee osteoarthritis is remanded.
Entitlement to an increased rating in excess of 10 percent for right knee traumatic osteoarthritis is remanded.
REASONS FOR REMAND
The Veteran served on active duty from March 1986 to August 1990.
This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2011 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). This case was most recently remanded by the Board in January 2018 for further development.
After the January 2018 Board remand, the issue of entitlement to service connection for a right ankle disability was granted in a September 2018 rating decision. Because that decision represents a full grant of the benefit sought, the issue is no longer before the Board. Grantham v. Brown, 114 F.3d 1156 (Fed. Cir. 1997).

Entitlement to increased ratings for left knee osteoarthritis and right knee traumatic osteoarthritis.
The Veteran has undergone several VA knee examinations, most recently in July 2018. Even though the July 2018 VA examination discusses range of motion measurement results on active and passive motion, none of the VA examinations of record provide such measurement results in weight-bearing and non-weight-bearing circumstances; instead, merely pain was noted. See Correia v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 158, 165-170 (2016). Accordingly, remand is necessary for a new VA examination to obtain such information. See also Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998).
The matters are REMANDED for the following action:
1. The AOJ should obtain copies of VA treatment records for the Veteran’s disabilities from May 2018 to the present.
2. After the above development is completed, the AOJ should arrange for an orthopedic examination of the Veteran to assess the current severity of his service-connected bilateral knee disabilities. The examiner must review the entire record (including this remand) in conjunction with the examination and note such review was conducted. Pathology, symptoms (frequency and severity), and any associated impairment of function should be described in detail. All indicated tests or studies should be completed.
Range of motion measurements must be included for active and passive motion, and weight-bearing and non-weight-bearing circumstances. If pain is noted, the point in the range of motion at which pain starts should be clearly noted.
If feasible, the examiner must assess the additional functional impairment on repeated use or during flare-ups in terms of the degree of additional range of motion loss, using lay observations specifically elicited from the Veteran. If not feasible, the examiner must provide a detailed explanation and rationale for why such could not be accomplished. Specifically, if the medical professional cannot provide an opinion without resorting to mere speculation, he or she must provide a complete explanation for why an opinion cannot be rendered; a rationale based on the fact that the Veteran is not having a flare-up at the time of the examination will not be deemed adequate.
3. If upon completion of the above action the issues remain denied, the case should be returned to the Board after compliance with appellate procedures.
 
E. I. VELEZ
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	J. Sandler, Associate Counsel