Citation Nr: 18161113 Decision Date: 12/28/18 Archive Date: 12/28/18 DOCKET NO. 17-14 154 DATE: December 28, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent from January 4, 2013, to January 12, 2015, and from March 1, 2015, to March 17, 2016, for post-traumatic degenerative joint disease of the left knee, is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent from January 4, 2013, to March 17, 2016, for instability of the left knee is remanded. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 30 percent from May 1, 2017, for total left knee replacement is remanded. Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for scars, residual, status post left knee surgeries, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Marine Corps from September 1987 to March 1996. Since the Veteran was initially awarded service connection for his left knee meniscectomy surgical scar, he has undergone additional surgeries. As these surgical interventions all pertain to the service-connected left knee disability, the issue has been recharacterized as noted above. The Veteran’s service-connected left knee disability was initially rated under 38 C.F.R. § 4.71a, Diagnostic Codes (DC) 5257 and 5260, with 10 percent evaluations under each code. He underwent surgical debridement of the left knee in January 2015, and therefore received a 100 percent temporary total disability rating (which was assigned under DC 5260) from January 12, 2015, to March 1, 2015. A February 2017 Statement of the Case (SOC) was issued, confirming the prior evaluations. Thereafter, evidence that a total knee replacement was performed on March 17, 2016, was received. In a June 2017 rating decision, the Veteran’s left knee disability was consolidated under DC 5055 pertaining to post-operative knee replacements at a 100 percent temporary total rating from March 17, 2016, to May 1, 2017. The Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) then awarded a 30 percent rating, effective May 1, 2017. Subsequent to the total knee replacement in March 2016, the Veteran has not been afforded a VA examination to determine the nature and extent of his current left knee disability and left knee surgical scars. As such, an examination is needed. This also will give the agency of original jurisdiction the opportunity to consider the VA medical treatment records added to the claims file, relevant to the periods of time on appeal for which the Veteran was not granted a temporary total 100 percent evaluation for his knee disability prior to the total knee replacement. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain any updated relevant VA treatment records since April 2017 and add them to the claims file. 2. Schedule the Veteran for an orthopedic examination with an appropriate medical professional to ascertain the current severity and manifestations of his service-connected left knee disability and left knee surgical scars. Any and all studies, tests, and evaluations deemed necessary by the examiner should be performed. (a.) In reporting the results of range of motion testing, the examiner should identify any objective evidence of pain, and the degree at which pain begins. (b.) Pursuant to Correia v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 158 (2016), the examination should record the results of range of motion testing for the left knee on both active and passive motion and in weight-bearing and nonweight-bearing. If the left knee cannot be tested on “weight-bearing,” then the examiner should specifically indicate that such testing cannot be done. (c.) The examiner should also express an opinion concerning whether there would be additional functional impairment on repeated use or during flare-ups. The examiner should assess the additional functional impairment on repeated use or during flare-ups in terms of the degree of additional range of motion loss. (d.) In regard to flare-ups, if the Veteran is not currently experiencing a flare-up, based on relevant information elicited from the Veteran, review of the file, and the current examination results regarding the frequency, duration, characteristics, severity, and functional loss regarding flares, the examiner is requested to provide an estimate of the Veteran’s functional loss due to flares expressed in terms of the degree of additional range of motion lost, or explain why the examiner cannot do so. (e.) Additionally, the examiner should determine whether the Veteran’s left knee has chronic residuals consisting of severe painful motion or weakness. (f.) All opinions provided should be fully explained. If any requested opinion cannot be provided without resort to speculation, the examiner should so state and explain why an opinion cannot be provided without resort to speculation. 3. After completing the above, and any other development as may be indicated by any response received as a consequence of the actions taken in the preceding paragraphs, the Veteran’s claims concerning the entire period on appeal should be readjudicated based on all the evidence. If the claims remain denied, the Veteran and his representative should be issued an SSOC. An appropriate period should be allowed for response. The case should thereafter be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration, if otherwise in order. MICHAEL E. KILCOYNE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Rachel E. Jensen, Associate Counsel