Citation Nr: 1328331 Decision Date: 09/05/13 Archive Date: 09/16/13 DOCKET NO. 12-10 902 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Muskogee, Oklahoma THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to service connection for a right knee disability. 2. Entitlement to service connection for a left knee disability. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Oklahoma Department of Veterans Affairs ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Russell P. Veldenz, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from July 1962 to July 1966. This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal of a rating decision in September 2010 of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Muskogee, Oklahoma. The appeal is remanded to the RO via the Appeals Management Center in Washington, DC. REMAND A review of the service treatment records indicates that in June 1966, the Veteran sought treatment after he was in a motor vehicle accident. Current VA x-rays have revealed degenerative changes in both knees. The Veteran was provided a VA examination in August 2012, and the VA examiner offered an opinion as to the relationship of the right knee to service. For a rationale, however, the examiner merely repeated his conclusion that the current right knee disability was not related to service and that there were no other injuries noted in the service treatment records regarding the June 1966 motor vehicle accident. An opinion was not offered regarding whether a left knee disorder was related to his military service. The August 2012 VA examination is insufficient for adjudication purposes. See Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 312 (2007) (holding that when VA undertakes to provide a VA examination or obtain a VA opinion, it must ensure that the examination or opinion is adequate). First, as the Veteran has filed for service connection for both knees, a remand is necessary to obtain an opinion as to whether the left knee disability is related to the Veteran's service, including the motor vehicle accident. Second, as to the right knee, the examiner did not discuss whether the Veteran's right knee disability was due to or aggravated by the Veteran's military service, other than the June 1966 auto accident. Finally, the examiner provided an insufficient explanation or basis for the conclusion he reached. Accordingly, the case is remanded for the following action: 1. The RO must contact the Veteran and afford him the opportunity to identify or submit any additional pertinent evidence in support of his claims. Based on his response, the RO must attempt to procure copies of all records which have not previously been obtained from identified treatment sources. All attempts to secure this evidence must be documented in the claims file by the RO. If, after making reasonable efforts to obtain named records the RO is unable to secure same, the RO must notify the Veteran and (a) identify the specific records the RO is unable to obtain; (b) briefly explain the efforts that the RO made to obtain those records; (c) describe any further action to be taken by the RO with respect to the claim; and (d) that he is ultimately responsible for providing the evidence. The Veteran and his representative must then be given an opportunity to respond. 2. The Veteran must be afforded the appropriate VA examinations to determine whether any right and/or left knee disorder found is related to his military service. All pertinent symptomatology and findings must be reported in detail. Any indicated diagnostic tests and studies must be accomplished. The claims file and all electronic records, to include on Virtual VA, must be made available to the examiner, and the examiner must specify in the examination report that these records have been reviewed. The examiner must specify the dates encompassed by the Virtual VA records that were reviewed. Based on the clinical examination, a review of the evidence of record, and with consideration of the Veteran's statements, the examiner must state whether any diagnosed right and/or left knee disorder is related to the Veteran's active duty service, to include the motor vehicle accident in 1966. A complete rationale for all opinions must be provided. If the examiner cannot provide the requested opinion without resorting to speculation, it must be so stated, and the examiner must provide the reasons why an opinion would require speculation. The examiner must indicate whether there was any further need for information or testing necessary to make a determination. Additionally, the examiner must indicate whether any opinion could not be rendered due to limitations of knowledge in the medical community at large and not those of the particular examiner. The report prepared must be typed. 3. The RO must notify the Veteran that it is his responsibility to report for any examination scheduled, and to cooperate in the development of the claims. The consequences for failure to report for a VA examination without good cause may include denial of the claims. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.158, 3.655 (2013). In the event that the Veteran does not report for any scheduled examination, documentation must be obtained and associated with the Veteran's claims file that shows that notice scheduling the examination was sent to his last known address. Documentation must be also be obtained and associated with the Veteran's claims file demonstrating any notice that was sent was returned as undeliverable. 4. After completing the above actions, and any other development as may be indicated by any response received as a consequence of the actions taken above, the claims on appeal must be readjudicated. If any issue on appeal remains denied, a supplemental statement of the case must be provided to the Veteran and his representative. After the Veteran and his representative have had an adequate opportunity to respond, the appeal must be returned to the Board for appellate review. No action is required by the Veteran until he receives further notice; however, he may present additional evidence or argument while the case is in remand status at the RO. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). _________________________________________________ JOY A. MCDONALD 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) (2012).