Citation Nr: 0810404 Decision Date: 03/28/08 Archive Date: 04/09/08 DOCKET NO. 06-29 189 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Atlanta, Georgia THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral knee disorder. 2. Entitlement to service connection for a back disorder. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Virginia A. Girrard-Brady, Attorney ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD D. Orfanoudis, Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran had active service from October 1992 to October 2000. This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2001 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), Regional Office (RO), located in Atlanta, Georgia, which denied the above claims. This case was previously before the Board in March 2006, at which time it was remanded for additional development. It is now returned to the Board for appellate review. The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the appellant if further action is required. REMAND Unfortunately, appellate review of the veteran's claims at this time would be premature. Although the Board sincerely regrets the additional delay, a remand in this matter is necessary to ensure that there is a complete record upon which to decide the veteran's claim so that he is afforded every possible consideration. Service connection if warranted where the facts, shown by evidence, establish that a particular injury or disease resulting in disability was incurred in the line of duty in the active military service or, if pre-existing such service, was aggravated during service. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1110 (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a) (2007). In order to prevail on the issue of service connection for any particular disability, there must be medical evidence of a current disability; medical evidence, or in certain circumstances, lay evidence of in-service occurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and medical evidence of a nexus between an in-service injury or disease and the current disability. See Hickson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 247, 253 (1999); see also Pond v. West, 12 Vet App. 341, 346 (1999). The veteran asserts that he has current bilateral knee and low back disorders that were first manifested during his period of active service. A review of his service medical records reveals that in December 1994, he was diagnosed with a right knee sprain; in June 1998, he was diagnosed with possible low back strain; and in July 1998, he was diagnosed with left knee strain. In the veteran's separation report of medical history dated in January 2000, he indicated having a problem with his knees and frequent low back pain. Subsequent to service, a VA examination report dated in April 2001, shows that the examiner provided final diagnoses of knee strain and back strain. The examiner, however, did not provide an opinion as to the etiology of the currently diagnosed knee and back strains. A private medical treatment records from the South Coast Medical Associates dated in February 2002 shows, in pertinent part, that the veteran denied back or extremity pain, and an assessment of a normal physical examination was provided. In June 2004, the veteran, in pertinent part, reported low back pain following a motor vehicle accident. The assessment was normal lumbar spine. As there is competent medical evidence that the veteran had bilateral knee and back strains in service, and a diagnosis of knee and back strains subsequent to service, the Board finds that a medical examination is necessary so that the nature and etiology of any current bilateral knee and low back disorders found on examination may be determined. See McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The RO/AMC shall schedule the veteran for an appropriate VA orthopedic examination in order to determine the nature and etiology of any bilateral knee or low back disorder found on examination. The entire claims file and a copy of this Remand must be reviewed by the examiner in conjunction with conducting the examination. All necessary tests and studies should be performed, and all findings must be reported in detail. The examiner should render an opinion as to whether any right knee, left knee or low back disorder found on examination had its onset during the veteran's period of active service, to include the reported incidents of bilateral knee and low back strains as set forth above. The examiner should also opine as to whether any bilateral knee or low back disorder found on examination was the result of an intervening incident, such as the reported motor vehicle accident in June 2004. In doing so, the examiner should acknowledge the veteran's report of a continuity of symptomatology. Any opinions expressed must be accompanied by a complete rationale. 2. The RO/AMC will then review the veteran's claims file and ensure that the foregoing development actions have been conducted and completed in full, and that no other notification or development action, in addition to those directed above, is required. If further action is required, it should be undertaken prior to further claim adjudication. 3. The RO/AMC will then readjudicate the veteran's claims. If the benefits sought on appeal remain denied, the veteran and his representative should be provided with a Supplemental Statement of the Case, containing notice of all relevant actions taken on the claim, to include a summary of the evidence and applicable law and regulations considered pertinent to the issue currently on appeal. An appropriate period of time should be allowed for response. Thereafter, the case is to be returned to the Board, following applicable appellate procedure. The veteran need take no action until he is so informed. He has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded to the RO. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). The purposes of this remand are to obtain additional information and comply with all due process considerations. No inference should be drawn regarding the final disposition of this claim as a result of this action. This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner. See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2007). _________________________________________________ STEVEN D. REISS Acting Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2007).