Citation Nr: 21013505 Decision Date: 03/09/21 Archive Date: 03/09/21 DOCKET NO. 15-23 570 DATE: March 9, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 10 percent for right knee limitation of flexion due to chondromalacia and degenerative joint disease, status post medial meniscal tear, prior to October 13, 2017, and in excess of 0 percent thereafter is remanded. Entitlement to a compensable disability rating for right knee limitation of extension due to chondromalacia and degenerative joint disease, status post medial meniscal tear, prior to October 13, 2017, and in excess of 10 percent thereafter is remanded. Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 10 percent for left knee patellofemoral syndrome is remanded. INTRODUCTION The Veteran had active service from October 2002 to July 2009. When this case was previously before the Board in July 2018 and June 2020, the above-noted issues were remanded for additional development. The case has since been returned for further appellate review. REASONS FOR REMAND While additional delay of the above-noted claims is untenable, the Board finds further development is required before the Veteran’s claims are decided. As previously noted, when VA undertakes to provide a VA examination or obtain a VA opinion, it must ensure that the examination or opinion is adequate. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 312 (2007). In the course of both the July 2018 and June 2020 remands, the Board fully explained that an assessment of the Veteran’s flare-ups, as well as range of motion measurements in weight bearing, non-weight bearing, and in passive motion were necessary to properly evaluate the Veteran’s bilateral knee disabilities. See Sharp v. Shulkin, 29 Vet. App. 26 (2017); see also Correia v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 158 (2016). The Board remanded these matters in June 2020 to obtain additional information from the May 2019 VA examiner, which addressed these critical evaluative criteria. However, by way of a June 2020 addendum, the examiner merely reiterated statements made in the May 2019 examination report, which the Board previously found lacking. As such, a remand is again required. A remand by the Board confers upon the claimant, as a matter of law, the right to compliance with the remand instructions, and imposes upon VA a concomitant duty to ensure compliance with the terms of the remand. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). Accordingly, these matters are REMANDED for the following actions: Afford the Veteran a VA examination by an examiner with sufficient expertise, who has not previously examined this Veteran, to fully assess the severity of the Veteran’s service-connected left and right knee disabilities. All pertinent evidence of record should be made available to and reviewed by the examiner. Any indicated studies should be performed. Ensure the examiner provides all information required for rating purposes, to specifically include both active and passive range of motion testing, as well as weight-bearing and nonweight-bearing range of motion assessments. In addition, the examiner must consider and discuss all procurable and assembled data such as the frequency, duration, characteristics, precipitating and alleviating factors, and the severity of the flare-ups, and then provide an assessment of the functional loss during flares, if possible in degrees of motion lost. If the examiner is unable to conduct the required testing or concludes that the required testing is not necessary, he or she should be directed to clearly explain why that is so. T. REYNOLDS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board G. Fraser, 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.