Citation Nr: 21029749 Decision Date: 05/14/21 Archive Date: 05/14/21 DOCKET NO. 14-35 280 DATE: May 14, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for service-connected right ankle degenerative joint disease, sprain, and weakness is remanded. Entitlement to a total rating based on individual employability due to service-connected disabilities (TDIU) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from September 1971 to September 1981. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2014 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Boston, Massachusetts. The Veteran testified at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) in November 2017. A transcript is of record. This matter was remanded by the Board in May 2018 and December 2020 for further development. 1. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for service-connected right ankle degenerative joint disease, sprain, and weakness is remanded. A new examination of the Veteran's right ankle degenerative joint disease, sprain, and weakness is warranted that complies with the testing requirements set forth in 38 C.F.R. § 4.59. See Correia v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 158 (2016). As noted in the December 2020 Board remand, the June 2018 and October 2020 VA examinations did not comply with the requirements of Correia. The Board ordered a new VA examination, which took place in February 2021. The February 2021 VA examination report, like the June 2018 and October 2020 VA examinations, does not reflect range of motion (ROM) testing measurements for pain in weightbearing and non-weightbearing, as required under Correia. Accordingly, a new examination must be obtained. 2. Entitlement to a TDIU is remanded. The Veteran asserts entitlement to a TDIU, in pertinent part, on the basis that he cannot work due to his ankles. As the appropriate rating for his service-connected right ankle degenerative joint disease, sprain and weakness, is the subject of the remand herein and not yet determined, the issue of entitlement to a TDIU is not ripe for adjudication by the Board. Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180, 183 (1991) (two issues are "inextricably intertwined" when they are so closely tied together that a final decision on one issue cannot be rendered until a decision on the other issue has been rendered). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain the Veteran's updated VA treatment records. 2. Arrange for a VA examination (or telehealth interview, review of the record, etc. if an in-person examination is not feasible) of the Veteran's service-connected right ankle degenerative joint disease, sprain, and weakness, to assess the severity of the disability for the entire period on appeal. The entire claims file and a copy of this REMAND must be made available to the examiner in conjunction with the examination. In the examination report, the examiner must include all of the following: Correia factors: A. Active range of motion testing results. B. Passive range of motion testing results. C. Weightbearing range of motion testing results. D. Non-weightbearing range of motion testing results. The examiner must provide a numerical range of motion result for each of the above. If the examiner is unable to conduct the required testing or concludes that the required testing is not necessary in this case, he or she should clearly explain why that is so. Flare-ups (Sharp): The examiner must elicit as much information as possible from the Veteran regarding the severity, frequency, and duration of flare-ups, their effect on functioning, and precipitating and alleviating factors. (Continued on the next page) If the examination is not performed during a flare-up, the examiner must provide an estimate of additional loss of range of motion during a flare-up. If the examiner is unable to provide an estimate of additional loss of motion during a flare-up, the examiner must provide a specific explanation as to why the available information, including the Veteran's own statements, is not sufficient to make such an estimate. P.M. DILORENZO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board T. Mohammad 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.