Citation Nr: 1132002 Decision Date: 08/30/11 Archive Date: 09/07/11 DOCKET NO. 09-48 790 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Denver, Colorado THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for a left knee disorder. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD William Alan Nelson II, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran, who is the appellant, served on active duty from November 1952 to November 1954. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a March 2009 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Denver, Colorado. The claim at issue was previously remanded by the Board in August 2010 for further evidentiary development of requesting VA and private treatment records and a VA joints examination with a diagnosis and a medical nexus opinion. This was accomplished, and the claim was readjudicated in a June 2011 supplemental statement of the case. See Dyment v. West, 13 Vet. App. 141, 146-47 (1999) (remand not required under Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998), where the Board's remand instructions were substantially complied with), aff'd, Dyment v. Principi, 287 F.3d 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2002). Please note this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2010). 38 U.S.C.A. § 7107(a)(2) (West 2002). The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC) in Washington, DC. REMAND A remand is required in this case to ensure that there is a complete record upon which to decide the Veteran's claim for service connection for a left knee disorder so that he is afforded every possible consideration. VA has a duty to make reasonable efforts to assist a claimant in obtaining evidence necessary to substantiate the claim for the benefits sought, unless no reasonable possibility exists that such assistance would aid in substantiating the claim. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A(a) (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c), (d) (2010). In February 2009, the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) confirmed that the Veteran's service records for his active service were not available. When a veteran's records are lost or destroyed, VA has a heightened duty to assist, which includes searching for alternate records. Washington v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 362, 369-71 (2005). The Board finds that, in this case, VA's duty to assist in the development of the claim has been not satisfied as additional service treatment records may exist which have not been obtained. VA will make as many requests as are necessary to obtain relevant records from a Federal department or agency. These records include but are not limited to military records, including service treatment (medical) records; treatment and other records from VA medical facilities; records from non-VA facilities providing examination or treatment at VA expense; and records from other Federal agencies, such as the Social Security Administration. VA will end its efforts to obtain records from a Federal department or agency only if VA concludes that the records sought do not exist or that further efforts to obtain those records would be futile. Cases in which VA may conclude that no further efforts are required include those in which the Federal department or agency advises VA that the requested records do not exist or the custodian does not have them. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (2010). The record indicates that the Veteran is receiving Social Security Administration (SSA) disability benefits. In the April 2011 VA joints examination, the Veteran reported receiving SSA disability benefits for bilateral knee arthritis. SSA records are relevant to a claim and VA must obtain them where either (1) there is an SSA decision pertaining to a medical condition related to the one for which the veteran is seeking service connection or (2) there are specific allegations "giv[ing] rise to a reasonable belief" that the SSA records may pertain to the claimed disability. Golz v. Shinseki, 590 F.3d 1317, 1323 (Fed. Cir. 2010). Here, the SSA records are potentially pertinent to the Veteran's claim because the Veteran has reported receiving SSA disability benefits for a bilateral knee disorder. Accordingly, upon remand, the RO should attempt to obtain a copy of the decision granting SSA disability benefits and all supporting medical documentation. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: (Please note, this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2010). Expedited handling is requested.) 1. The RO/AMC should attempt to obtain a copy of any SSA decision awarding disability benefits for the Veteran, copies of all medical records upon which any such SSA disability benefit award was based, and a copy of any medical records associated with any subsequent disability determinations by the SSA for the Veteran. All requests for records and their responses should be clearly delineated in the claims folder. 2. The RO/AMC should notify the Veteran in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(e) if the SSA records are unavailable. 3. Thereafter, the file (including the additional records) should be referred to the VA examiner who previously afforded the Veteran a VA joints examination for the purpose of obtaining an addendum opinion regarding whether the additional records alter the previous opinion regarding the relationship of the current left knee disorder to service. 4. Thereafter, the RO should readjudicate the Veteran's claim for service connection for a left knee disorder. If the benefit sought on appeal remains denied, the Veteran and his representative should be provided a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC). An appropriate period of time should be allowed for response. The purpose of this remand is to obtain additional development. No inference should be drawn regarding the final disposition of the claim in question as a result of this action. The Veteran has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). The Veteran is advised to appear and participate in any scheduled VA reexamination, as failure to do so may result in denial of the claim. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.655 (2010). 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. 2010). _________________________________________________ J. Parker 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) (2010).