Citation Nr: 22017805 Decision Date: 03/26/22 Archive Date: 03/26/22 DOCKET NO. 17-29 258 DATE: March 26, 2022 REMANDED Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 10 percent for right knee chondromalacia patellofemoral syndrome with degenerative changes is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from March 1989 to March 1993, with three months prior active service, and May 1999 to November 2008. The Board thanks the Veteran for his service to our country. This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a November 2016 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office\Agency of Original Jurisdiction (RO\AOJ). In October 2020, the Veteran testified at a Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of that hearing is of record. He waived RO consideration of any additional evidence added to his file. This appeal was previously before the Board June 2021, when the matter of service connection for a cervical spine disorder was also remanded. Upon consideration of additional evidence obtained pursuant to the June 2021 Board remand, an interim December 2021 rating decision granted service connection for cervical spine degenerative arthritis. As this rating decision represents a complete grant of the Veteran's claim for service connection for a cervical spine disorder, the appeal as to this claim has been resolved and it is no longer on appeal before the Board. See generally Grantham v. Brown, 114 F.3d 116 (Fed. Cir. 1997); Barrera v. Gober, 122 F.3d 1030 (Fed. Cir. 1997). 1. Right Knee Increased Rating The June 2021 Board remand included the instruction to obtain private treatment records in connection with his November 2020 right knee replacement surgery. In June 2021, the AOJ requested authorization from the Veteran to obtain these records and, alternatively, suggested he may want to obtain and submit them himself. The Veteran did not respond to this request. However, review of his updated VA treatment records obtained pursuant to the Board remand shows VA may have possession of these records. Specifically, VA treatment records, including during the period from November 2020 to January 2021, show the Veteran underwent right knee replacement on November 16, 2020, and indicate numerous non-VA treatment records were scanned into VistA Imaging during this period, including from Capital Region Medical Center dated November 16, 2020. On remand, the AOJ should attempt to obtain all documents in VistA Imaging which relate to the Veteran's November 2020 right knee replacement surgery. In addition, as the Veteran's most recent June 2019 VA knee examination was prior to his November 2020 right knee replacement surgery, an updated VA examination is needed to assess the nature and severity of his post-surgery right knee disabilities. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Secure for the record copies of complete updated clinical records (any not already of record) of all VA and/or private treatment the Veteran has received for his right knee, to include records related to his November 16, 2020 right knee replacement surgery. Such efforts should include printing all VistA Imaging documents relating to the Veteran's right knee, including, but not limited to, the November 2020 right knee surgery and complete pre-operative and post-operative records and uploading the printed VistA records into VBMS. Records that need to be printed and uploaded to VBMS include VistA records that CAPRI records reflect were scanned on November 26, 2020, and on January 5, 2021. The Board does not have access to VistA. 2. After the record has been determined to be complete, please schedule the Veteran for a VA examination (or telehealth interview, review of the record, etc., if an in-person examination is not feasible) to assess the nature and severity of his post-surgery right knee disabilities. After interview and examination of the Veteran and review of the record, the examiner should: a) Conduct range of motion testing, specifically noting the ranges of motion in degrees on active and passive motion, weight-bearing and nonweight-bearing (as service connection is also in effect for left knee disability, comparison to the opposite undamaged joint is not possible). 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. b) The examiner must elicit as much information as possible from the Veteran regarding the severity, frequency, and duration of any flare-ups, their effect on functioning, and precipitating and alleviating factors. 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. Detailed rationale is requested for all opinions provided. If an opinion cannot be provided without resort to speculation, the examiner should provide an explanation as to why this is so and note what, if any, additional evidence would permit such an opinion to be made. M. C. GRAHAM Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board K Hughes 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.