Citation Nr: 21072275 Decision Date: 12/02/21 Archive Date: 12/02/21 DOCKET NO. 16-01 839 DATE: December 2, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial rating more than 10 percent for right knee strain with osteoarthritis and medial meniscal degeneration (right knee disorder) prior to July 23, 2019 is remanded. Entitlement to a rating more than 50 percent for a right knee disorder after July 23, 2019 is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Navy from February 1968 to October 1972. In September 2018 and February 2021, the Board remanded the appeal for evidentiary development. It has since been returned to the Board for further consideration. 1. Entitlement to an initial rating more than 10 percent for right knee strain with osteoarthritis and medial meniscal degeneration (right knee disorder) prior to July 23, 2019 is remanded. 2. Entitlement to a rating more than 50 percent for a right knee disorder after July 23, 2019 is remanded. Review of the record reveals that a remand is required in order to provide another VA examination. To that end, the Board notes that the Veteran's most recent VA knee examination took place in July 2020. However, it appears that only the Veteran's left knee was examined, as range of motion and other testing for the right knee were reported as normal. The most recent and pertinent VA knee examination prior to that one was conducted in July 2019, which included testing for the right knee. Pursuant to prior remands, additional VA and private treatment records were obtained, along with some outstanding Social Security Administration (SSA) records. Based on a number of the private records recently uploaded, it appears that the Veteran's right knee disorder may have worsened since the time of his last VA examination. Specifically, private records from October 2019 reveal that the Veteran suffers from chronic knee pain and joint effusion. Additional reports from June 2020 indicate that the Veteran continues to suffer from knee pain and also experiences some numbness/swelling in his lower extremities. The history of the right knee disability shows a right anterior cruciate ligament chronic tear, right lateral meniscus tear due to old injury, and right medial meniscus tear due to old injury per a September 2018 private record. See Green v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 121 (1991) (VA has a duty to conduct a thorough and contemporaneous examination of the Veteran in an increased rating claim); Schafrath v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 589 (1991); see also Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400, 403 (1997) (a Veteran is entitled to a new examination after a two-year period between the last VA examination and the Veteran's contention that the pertinent disability had increased in severity). The Board emphasizes that it is curious that the Veteran underwent a VA knee examination in July 2020 which apparently revealed no diagnosis for the right knee and right knee testing was normal. Instead, it appears that the examiner chose to focus his findings on the Veteran's left knee, despite the fact that the Veteran is also service-connected for a right knee disorder. Given the above, a contemporaneous VA examination is warranted. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to evaluate the severity of his right knee disorder. The entire claims file must be provided to the examiner for review, and the examination report should reflect that such a review was accomplished. All clinically indicated tests and consultations should be performed and any findings reported in detail. The VA examination must include joint testing for pain on both active and passive motion, in weight-bearing and nonweight-bearing and, if possible, with range of motion measurements of the opposite undamaged joint. The examiner should indicate whether there is objective evidence of pain on motion, weakness, excess fatigability, instability, and/or incoordination of the right knee and to what extent the Veteran experiences functional loss due to pain and/or any of the other symptoms noted above during flare-ups and/or with repeated use. 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 also specifically comment on the Veteran's lay statements, as applicable. The VA examiner should provide a complete rationale for any opinions provided. (Continued on the next page) 2. After the development requested has been completed, the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) should review any report to ensure that it is in complete compliance with the directives of this remand. If the report is deficient in any manner, the AOJ must implement corrective procedures at once. Emily Tamlyn Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Miller, 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.