Citation Nr: 21075304
Decision Date: 12/20/21	Archive Date: 12/20/21

DOCKET NO. 13-01 940
DATE: December 20, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for right knee injury, status post anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, with degenerative changes is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Army from September 1982 to February 2004.

1. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for right knee injury, status post anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, with degenerative changes is remanded.

Unfortunately, remand is again required for this issue. In January 2019 and September 2020, the Board specifically directed the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) to obtain an examination that measured the Veteran's right knee range of motion in (1) active motion, (2) passive motion, (3) weight-bearing, and (4) nonweight-bearing. The August 2021 examiner provided range of motion measurements in active and passive motion and found that the Veteran would experience pain with weight-bearing and nonweight-bearing. Presumably, the tests conducted on examination reflect nonweight-bearing range of motion. However, the examiner did not provide range of motion measurements in weight-bearing or explain why such measurements could not be obtained. Remand is required to ensure compliance with the Board's prior directives. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998).

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

1. Obtain and associate with the claims file any outstanding VA treatment records.

2. Request a new examination or medical opinion to address how pain affects the Veteran's range of right knee motion during weight-bearing. The examiner should specifically indicate whether the Veteran experiences any limitation of motion that is attributable to pain and at what point during the range of motion. 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 is advised that the Veteran is competent to report symptoms and history, and such reports must be considered. If the examiner rejects the Veteran's reports, the examiner must provide a reason for doing so.

 

 

A. S. CARACCIOLO

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	A.P. Armstrong

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.