Citation Nr: 18160258 Decision Date: 12/27/18 Archive Date: 12/26/18 DOCKET NO. 17-61 281 DATE: December 27, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for degenerative joint disease (DJD) of the right knee is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for degenerative joint disease (DJD) of the right knee is remanded. In April 2018, the Board remanded the issue on appeal for further development, to include a new VA examination to determine the current nature and severity of the Veteran’s service-connected right knee disability. An October 2018 invoice indicates that the Veteran was scheduled for an October 22, 2018 VA contract examination, but that the Veteran failed to appear for his scheduled contract examination. In a subsequent November 2018 statement, the Veteran indicated that he was unable to attend the October 22, 2018 examination due to being ill, and that he tried to reschedule the examination but was unable to do so. Additionally, it is unclear what notice was provided to the Veteran with respect to his October 22, 2018 VA contract examination, as no such notice is associated with the claims file. Given the lack of documentation of notice for the October 22, 2018 VA contract examination and because the Veteran provided good cause for his inability to attend that examination, the Board finds that a remand is necessary in order for VA to again attempt to schedule the Veteran for a VA examination. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998) (A remand by the Board confers upon the claimant, as a matter of law, the right to compliance with the remand order). The matter is REMANDED for the following action: Schedule the Veteran for an appropriate VA examination to determine the current nature and severity of his service-connected right knee disability. Notice to the Veteran of the scheduled examination must be documented in the claims file. The claims folder must be made available to and be reviewed by the examiner in conjunction with the examination. All tests deemed necessary should be conducted. If possible, such examination should be conducted during a flare-up. (a) The examiner should identify the current nature and severity of all manifestations of the Veteran’s right knee disability, to include any dislocation or removal of the semilunar cartilage. (b) The examiner should record the range of motion of the right knee observed on clinical evaluation in terms of degrees. If there is evidence of pain on motion, the examiner should indicate the degree of range of motion at which such pain begins, as well as whether such pain on movement results in any loss of range of motion. The examiner should record the results of range of motion testing for pain on BOTH active and passive motion, AND on weight-bearing and nonweight-bearing AND, if possible, with range of motion measurements of the opposite undamaged joint. If the examiner is unable to conduct the required testing or concludes that the required testing is not necessary in this case he or she should clearly explain why that so. (c) It is also imperative that the examiner comment on the functional limitations caused by flare-ups and repetitive use. In this regard, the examiner should indicate whether, and to what extent, the Veteran’s range of motion is additionally limited during flare-ups or on repetitive use, expressed, if possible, in terms of degrees, or explain why such details cannot be feasibly provided. (d) If the Veteran endorses experiencing flare-ups of his right knee disability, the examiner must obtain information regarding the frequency, duration, characteristics, severity, and/or functional loss related to such flare-ups. Then, if the examination is not being conducted during a flare-up, the examiner should provide an opinion based on estimates derived from the information above as to the additional loss of range of motion that may be present during a flare-up. If the examiner cannot provide an opinion as to additional loss of motion during a flare-up without resorting to mere speculation, the examiner must make clear that s/he has considered all procurable data (i.e., the information regarding frequency, duration, characteristics, severity, and/or functional loss related to such flare-ups elicited from the Veteran), but any member of the medical community at large could not provide such an opinion without resorting to speculation. M. HYLAND Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD B. Reed, Associate Counsel