Citation Nr: 21022608 Decision Date: 04/16/21 Archive Date: 04/16/21 DOCKET NO. 17-46 193 DATE: April 16, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an increased rating in excess of 10 percent for left knee degenerative joint disease is remanded. Entitlement to an increased rating in excess of 10 percent for right knee degenerative joint disease is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from January 1984 to November 1988. These matters are before the Board of Veterans’ Appeal (Board) on appeal from a November 2013 rating decision issued by the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Indianapolis, Indiana. The Veteran presented testimony on these issues at an October 2019 Travel Board hearing held at his local RO before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ). Addressing the relevant procedural history, these claims were previously before the Board in December of 2019 at which time the claims were remanded for additional development but has now been returned to the Board for further appellate action. Unfortunately, the Board finds that an additional remand is necessary for the reasons outlined below. During the pendency of the appeal, the rating criteria for evaluating musculoskeletal disabilities under 38 C.F.R. § 4.71a were amended effective February 7, 2021. 85 Fed. Reg. 230 (Nov. 30, 2020). The Veteran’s disabilities are currently rated under Diagnostic Codes 5003. Diagnostic Code 5003 has been amended from “arthritis, degenerative (hypertrophic or osteoarthritis)” to “degenerative arthritis other than post-traumatic”. Post-traumatic arthritis is now rated under Diagnostic Code 5010 (previously “arthritis, due to trauma, substantiated by X-ray findings”) which now has instructions to “rate as limitation of motion, dislocation, or other specified instability under the affected joint. If there are 2 or more joints affected, each rating shall be combined in accordance with § 4.25”. Because the record does not contain sufficient evidence to rate the Veteran’s disability under the new rating criteria, a VA addendum opinion is necessitated. Specifically, at the Veteran’s March 2020 Compensation and Pension examination, the examiner answered “yes” to the inquiry of whether “degenerative or traumatic arthritis [is] documented” and that it is present in “both” knees. While the Board notes that the examiner noted a diagnosis of degenerative arthritis, the Board cannot definitively exclude a concurrent diagnosis of traumatic arthritis as these conditions were combined in the above-noted inquiry. This question is now especially relevant given the recent regulatory amendments due to the changes outlined in detail above. Therefore, the Board cannot make a fully-informed decision until the case is remanded in order to obtain an addendum opinion and, if necessary, afford the Veteran an opportunity to attend an additional VA examination in order to clarify the Veteran’s bilateral knee condition. The matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Obtain any VA treatment records for the period relevant to the issues on appeal and associate them with the record.  2. Following the completion of step one, obtain an addendum opinion from an appropriately situated medical professional who should be, if possible, the VA examiner who provided the March 2020 examination. The medical professional must be provided with and review the entire claims file, to include a copy of this remand and it should be confirmed that such records were reviewed. The necessity of an additional in-person examination is left to the discretion of the medical professional. Following a review of the evidence of record, the medical professional should clarify whether the Veteran has degenerative arthritis, post-traumatic arthritis or both. In so opining, the medical professional is asked to clarify, to the extent possible, the above-noted March 2020 notation of “yes” to the inquiry of whether “degenerative or traumatic arthritis [is] documented” and that it is present in “both” knees. 3. Thereafter, readjudicate the claims on appeal, applying the new rating criteria. If the benefits sought remain denied, issue the Veteran and his representative a supplemental statement of the case and provide a reasonable opportunity to respond before returning this matter to the Board for further appellate review.  MICHAEL MARTIN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board K. Smith, Associate 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.