Citation Nr: 21067974 Decision Date: 11/08/21 Archive Date: 11/08/21 DOCKET NO. 14-44 129A DATE: November 8, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial disability rating greater than 10 percent for impairment of left knee due to degenerative joint disease, status post multiple surgeries is remanded. Entitlement to a disability rating greater than 20 percent for impairment of left knee due to degenerative joint disease, status post multiple surgeries is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from May 2004 to August 2005. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from the May 2011 and November 2011 rating decisions issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). 1. Entitlement to an initial disability rating greater than 10 percent for impairment of left knee due to degenerative joint disease, status post multiple surgeries is remanded. 2. Entitlement to a disability rating greater than 20 percent for impairment of left knee due to degenerative joint disease, status post multiple surgeries from January 2, 2014 is remanded. The Board must remand this claim for further development. The issue before the Board was remanded in a March 2021 for a new medical examination. Upon review of the examination, the Board concludes that a new examination is required. The Veteran was afforded a VA examination in April 2021. The examination found that the Veteran has a left knee meniscal tear and degenerative arthritis. Flexion was limited to 70 degrees. Extension went to 0 degrees. Repetitive motion of the knee resulted in an increase of flexion to 140 degrees. There was no evidence or history of recurrent patellar subluxation/dislocation. All joint tests were noted as normal and the VA examiner found that the Veteran did not have a history of subluxation or instability in his left knee. The Board concludes that the examination afforded to the Veteran was inadequate. A review of the Veteran's examinations from January 2014 and September 2020 note that the Veteran had a history of joint tests which showed a history of left knee instability, with medial-lateral instability observed. Repetitive motion testing, which had shown in past examinations that the Veteran's range of motion would decrease, resulted in an increase in range of motion. No explanation was provided for the increased range of motion during repetitive motion testing. The Board notes that at his July 2018 hearing, the Veteran testified to the use of a brace for his knee. Medical records from the Social Security Administration verify the use of a brace. However, no VA examiner has verified the use of a knee brace or why a brace would be needed. The Board also notes that the Agency of Original Jurisdiction did not seem to discuss the new regulations for diagnostic code 5257 in its May 2021 supplemental statement of the case. As such, remand is appropriate. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Return the claims file to an examiner of appropriate expertise to determine the current severity of his service-connected left knee disorder. (a.) The examiner is requested to ask the Veteran about his knee brace. If the examiner finds that the Veteran does use a knee brace, the examiner must state why. (b.) The examiner should specifically be looking for joint instability in the left knee, such as medial-lateral instability. If no joint instability is found, the examiner must explain why there is no instability, since prior VA examinations found instability. (c.) The examiner should verify if any irregularities, such as repetitive motion testing resulting in an increase in range of motion, occur during testing. (d.) A complete rationale for any opinion expressed should be provided in a report. The Veteran is competent to report symptoms and treatment, and his reports must be taken into account, along with the other evidence of record. 2. Readjudicate the claims at issue. The Agency of Original Jurisdiction should also discuss and implement the new criteria for Diagnostic Code 5257, effective February 7, 2021. H. N. SCHWARTZ Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Jonah Nelson, 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.