Citation Nr: 21012850 Decision Date: 03/05/21 Archive Date: 03/05/21 DOCKET NO. 15-41 125 DATE: March 5, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for left knee instability, status post anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, prior to July 7, 2015, is remanded. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 20 percent for left knee degenerative changes prior to July 7, 2015, is remanded. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 30 percent for status post left total knee arthroplasty as of September 1, 2016, is remanded. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for lumbar strain is remanded. Propriety of the assignment of the separate rating for radiculopathy of the left lower extremity affecting the sciatic nerve, evaluated as 20 percent disabling as of November 3, 2011, is remanded. Propriety of the assignment of the separate rating for radiculopathy of the right lower extremity affecting the sciatic nerve, evaluated as 20 percent disabling as of November 3, 2011, is remanded. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for left hip strain is remanded. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for right hip strain is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from February 1983 to June 1986. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a rating decision issued in May 2012 by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office. In April 2019, the Veteran testified at a Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of the hearing is associated with the record. In July 2019, the Board remanded the case for additional development. While on remand, a September 2020 rating decision awarded separate ratings for radiculopathy of the left and right lower extremities affecting the sciatic nerve, evaluated as 20 percent disabling as of November 3, 2011. As such separate ratings were assigned pursuant to Note (1) of General Rating Formula for Diseases and Injuries of the Spine under which his service-connected lumbar spine disability is rated, the propriety of the assigned effective dates and ratings for radiculopathy of the bilateral lower extremities is properly before the Board. The case now returns for further appellate review. 1. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for left knee instability, status post anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, prior to July 7, 2015. 2. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 20 percent for left knee degenerative changes prior to July 7, 2015. 3. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 30 percent for status post left total knee arthroplasty as of September 1, 2016. 4. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for lumbar strain. 5. Propriety of the assignment of the separate rating for radiculopathy of the left lower extremity affecting the sciatic nerve, evaluated as 20 percent disabling as of November 3, 2011. 6. Propriety of the assignment of the separate rating for radiculopathy of the right lower extremity affecting the sciatic nerve, evaluated as 20 percent disabling as of November 3, 2011. 7. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for left hip strain. 8. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for right hip strain. In the July 2019 Remand, the Board directed that the Veteran be afforded VA examinations so as to assess the nature and severity of his service-connected left knee, back, and bilateral hip disabilities, to include providing retrospective opinions addressing the range of motion findings recorded at a January 2012 VA examination. While the Veteran underwent such examinations in November 2019, at which time he declined range of motion testing for his bilateral hips due to pain and passive motion and nonweight-bearing testing were not feasible or applicable for his back disability, the examiner did not record the range of motion findings for pain on passive motion or in nonweight-bearing for the Veteran’s left knee disability or explain why such could not be provided. In addition, the examiner did not provide the requested retrospective opinions. Thus, the Board finds that a remand is necessary in order to ensure compliance with the prior remand orders by obtaining an addendum opinion addressing such matters. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Return the record, to include a copy of this Remand, to the VA clinician who conducted the November 2019 examination of the Veteran’s left knee, back, and bilateral hip disabilities, or an appropriate substitute if unavailable, for addendum opinions. Following a review of the record, the examiner should address the following inquiries: (A) Please provide an opinion as to the range of motion findings, expressed in terms of degrees (if possible), for pain on passive motion and in nonweight-bearing for the Veteran’s left knee at the time of the November 2019 VA examination. (B) Review the VA examinations containing range of motion findings pertinent to the Veteran’s left knee, back, and bilateral hip disabilities conducted in January 2012, and offer an opinion as to the range of motion findings, expressed in terms of degrees (if possible), for pain on both active and passive motion, on weight-bearing and nonweight-bearing and, if possible, with range of motion measurements of the opposite undamaged joint at such time. A rationale for any opinion offered should be provided. If the clinician is unable to provide such opinions, he or she should explain why such is not possible. A. JAEGER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board M. M. Celli, 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.