Citation Nr: 21012435 Decision Date: 03/04/21 Archive Date: 03/04/21 DOCKET NO. 15-06 869A DATE: March 4, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for right knee tricompartmental osteoarthritis is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from June 1979 to November 1985. This case comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal of a February 2013 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Board remanded this case in September 2018. The Board found that the January 2013 and February 2015 VA examinations were insufficient and instructed the RO to schedule the Veteran for a new examination. In the September 2018 remand directives, the examiner was requested to test the Veteran’s active motion, passive motion, and pain with weight-bearing and without weight-bearing. In addition, the examiner requested to attempt to elicit information regarding the severity, frequency, and duration of any flare-ups, and the degree of functional loss during flare-ups. To the extent possible, the examiner was requested to identify any symptoms and functional impairments due to right knee osteoarthritis. If unable to provide a specific measurement or an opinion regarding flare-ups, symptoms, the examiner was requested to state the reason. More importantly, the examiner was requested to provide retrospective estimate opinions about limitation on motion at the time of the 2013 and 2015 VA examinations. The United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) in Sharp reiterated that the Board can accept an examiner’s statement that an opinion cannot be provided without resort to speculation, but “it must be clear that this is predicated on a lack of knowledge among the ‘medical community at large’ and not the insufficient knowledge of the specific examiner.” Sharp v. Shulkin, 29 Vet. App. 26, 36 (2017) (quoting Jones v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 382, 390 (2010)). The Veteran was afforded a VA examination and opinion in June 2019. The examiner failed to give the retrospective opinion as requested in the September 2018 remand. This must be corrected on remand. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). The matter is REMANDED for the following action: Return the record, including this remand and the September 2018 remand, to the VA examiner who issued the June 2019 examination and opinion, or to another qualified VA examiner if that individual is not available, for the purpose of eliciting an addendum opinion as to retrospective estimate opinions about limitation of motion of the Veteran’s right knee at the time of the 2013 and 2015 VA examinations. To the extent possible, after reviewing the entire record, the examiner should consider active motion, passive motion, pain with weight-bearing, and without weight-bearing. The examiner should also consider the severity, frequency, and duration of any flare-ups, and the degree of functional loss during flare-ups. The examiner is also requested to identify any symptoms and functional impairments due to right knee osteoarthritis. If it is not possible to provide estimates of limitation on motion of the Veteran’s right knee at the time of the 2013 and 2015 VA examinations, the examiner must state and clearly explain the reason. All opinions must be supported by a rationale. A. C. MACKENZIE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Hetman 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.