Citation Nr: 20021310 Decision Date: 03/25/20 Archive Date: 03/25/20 DOCKET NO. 17-16 769 DATE: March 25, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for residuals of right knee injury to include degenerative joint disease and status post meniscectomy (hereinafter right knee disability) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from January 1979 to August 1983 and from April 1984 to August 1993. The matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2013 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In February 2020, the Veteran testified at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A copy of the proceeding is associated with the electronic claims file. During the February 2020 Board hearing, the Veteran alleged that his right knee disability worsened since his December 2015 VA examination. Specifically, he testified that his right knee locks and has instability and that he suffers from daily pain and irritation. When a veteran alleges that his service-connected disability has worsened since he was previously examined, a new examination may be required to evaluate the current degree of impairment. Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400 (1997); Caffrey v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 377 (1994). Given the foregoing, the Veteran should be scheduled for a VA examination to determine the current nature and severity of his right knee disability. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain updated VA treatment records. 2. Thereafter, schedule the Veteran for a VA examination with an appropriate medical professional to determine the current severity of his right knee disability. The examiner must record all pertinent medical complaints, symptoms, and clinical findings in detail. This includes the severity of any present instability in the knee. Both knees must be examined and all testing results (including range of motion findings) must be reported for both knees. The Veteran’s knees should be tested in both active and passive motion, in weight-bearing and non weight-bearing. If the Veteran experiences pain during range of motion testing, the examiner must note the point at which pain begins. 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 is so. The examiner must assess the additional functional impairment on repeated use or during flare-ups in terms of degree of additional range of motion loss, using lay observations specifically elicited from the Veteran. The examiner should work with the Veteran to estimate functional loss (to include range of motion limitations) during flare-ups by describing and demonstrating typical flare-up symptoms (and measuring these demonstrations with a goniometer). If it is not possible to provide a specific measurement or an opinion regarding flare-ups, symptoms, or functional impairment without speculation, the examiner must state whether the need to speculate is due to deficiency in the state of general and medical knowledge (no one could respond given medical science and the known facts), a deficiency in the record (additional facts are required), or the examiner (does not have the knowledge or training). Nathaniel J. Doan Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board C. Robinson, Associate Counsel The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.