Citation Nr: 18150103 Decision Date: 11/14/18 Archive Date: 11/14/18 DOCKET NO. 15-27 986 DATE: November 14, 2018 REMANDED ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for osteochondritis dessicans of the left knee is REMANDED. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served as a member of the United States Army, with active duty service from September 1980 through October 1980. This appeal comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from a rating decision issued September 2014, by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran was scheduled to appear at an October 2018 video conference hearing before the Board. However, the record reflects that the Veteran did not appear for the scheduled hearing. A request to reschedule the hearing was not received prior to the date of the hearing. Additionally, the record does not show that he has requested that the hearing be rescheduled. Accordingly, the Board will proceed with review of the appeal.   Entitlement to service connection for osteochondritis dessicans of the left knee is remanded. Although the Board regrets the additional delay, the Veteran’s remaining claims must be remanded before the Board is able to make a determination on the merits. Specifically, the Board finds that additional supporting evidence is required in developing the Veteran’s claim. The Board finds that a remand is required in order to obtain private treatment records of the Veteran’s left knee. A review of the medical evidence of record indicates that the Veteran had left knee replacement in 2011 in the civilian sector. See C&P Examination dated August 2014. The Veteran was discharged from the Army in October 1980 and first applied for service connection for osteochondritis dessicans of the left knee in March 2014. The Veteran’s medical treatment records show the Veteran was treated for osteochondritis dessicans of the left knee in October 1977. However, while the Veteran reported a 2011 left knee replacement in his C&P examination, no records have been associated with the Veteran’s file documenting this operation. Therefore, the conclusion that the Veteran’s left knee disability was not aggravated in service cannot be affirmatively determined in the absence of these records. Finally, as the Veteran’s claim is being remanded, the Board requests that the AOJ contact the Veteran to ensure all available medical records have been obtained and associated with the claims file. The VA’s duty to assist includes obtaining records of relevant VA medical treatment. 38 U.S.C. §5103A(c)(2); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (c)(2), (c)(3). See also Bell v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 611 (1992) (The VA is charged with constructive, if not actual, knowledge of evidence generated by the VA). Therefore, the AOJ should obtain and associate with the claims file any outstanding VA medical records, assuming they are adequately identified by the Veteran after any necessary clarification.   Accordingly, the matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The AOJ should contact the Veteran, and, with his assistance, identify any additional outstanding records of pertinent medical treatment from the VA or private health care providers that have treated him for osteochondritis dessicans of the left knee. In particular, the Veteran should identify the provider that performed his 2011 left knee replacement. Follow the procedures for obtaining the records set forth by 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c). If the AOJ’s attempts to obtain any outstanding records results in a finding that such records are unavailable, the Veteran should be notified in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(e). 2. After completing the above development, the AOJ should review the claims file and ensure that all of the foregoing development actions have been conducted and completed in full. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). 3. Thereafter, the AOJ should consider all of the evidence of record and readjudicate the claim on appeal. If the benefit sought is not granted, issue a Supplemental Statement of the Case (“SSOC”) and allow the Veteran and his representative an opportunity to respond. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). 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. §§ 5109B, 7112. DAVID L. WIGHT Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Kathryn Bristor