Citation Nr: 21077461 Decision Date: 12/29/21 Archive Date: 12/29/21 DOCKET NO. 10-24 935 DATE: December 29, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a rating in excess of 20 percent for a left ankle disability is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for a right knee disability prior to November 13, 2020, and a rating in excess of 20 percent thereafter is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active duty service from October 1979 to May 1983. These matters come before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from March 2008 and May 2009 rating decisions issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In the March 2008 rating decision, the RO, in pertinent part, increased the disability rating for a left ankle disability to 20 percent, effective July 20, 2007. In the May 2009 rating decision, the RO, in relevant part, granted service connection for a right knee disability and assigned a 10 percent disability rating, effective July 22, 2008. In a subsequent December 2020 rating decision, the RO increased the right knee disability rating to 20 percent, effective November 13, 2020. The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) at a hearing in March 2012. A copy of the transcript has been reviewed and associated with the claims file. These matters were last before the Board in June 2021, at which time they were remanded for additional evidentiary development. 1. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 20 percent for a left ankle disability is remanded; 2. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for a right knee disability prior to November 13, 2020, and a rating in excess of 20 percent thereafter is remanded. In the June 2021 remand instructions, the Board requested the RO to obtain addendum medical opinions regarding the estimates of the Veteran's right knee range of motion in the weight bearing position and his left ankle range of motion in the non-weight bearing position. In lieu of requesting these medical opinions, the RO scheduled the Veteran for VA examinations and the examiner indicated that she was unable to provide the medical opinions without resorting to speculation given the Veteran's cognitive deficits. The examiner did not conduct a review of the record and the November 2020 VA examination and provide the requested medical opinions as directed in the remand instructions. After a review of the evidence, the Board finds that addendum medical opinions are warranted on remand in compliance with its previous remand instructions. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). The matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Obtain and associate with the claims file the Veteran's updated VA treatment records from August 2021 to the present. 2. After completion of #1, forward the claims file, including a copy of this remand, to the November 2020 examiner for addendum medical opinions regarding the severity of the Veteran's left knee and right ankle disabilities. If the November 2020 examiner is unavailable, forward to an appropriate clinician. The examiner should conduct a review of the record, including a copy of this remand, and such review should be noted in the examination report. The examiner should respond the following questions: A. With regard to the November 2020 VA examination, provide an estimate of the Veteran's right knee range of motion in the weight bearing position and note at which point there is pain, if any. B. With regard to the November 2020 VA examination, provide an estimate of the Veteran's left ankle range of motion in the non-weight bearing position and note at which point there is pain, if any. C. With regard to the November 2020 VA examinations for the right knee and left ankle, indicate how far back the results would apply (i.e., one year, two years, etc.). (Continued on the next page) The examiner is to attempt to elicit information from the record to reply to A, B, and C. Should the examiner maintain that they cannot do so without resorting to speculation, they must explain why this is so. Note: Any inability to furnish such an estimate must be predicated on a lack of medical knowledge among the medical community at large and not the insufficient knowledge of the examiner. The examiner may indicate the degree of confidence that they place on their estimate, on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being least confident and 5 being most confident. The examiner should provide a comprehensive rationale for each opinion provided. Eric S. Leboff Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Merrick 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.