Citation Nr: 20036760 Decision Date: 05/28/20 Archive Date: 05/28/20 DOCKET NO. 16-51 405 DATE: May 28, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a left knee disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a right knee disability, including as secondary to a left knee disability, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active duty service from October 2007 to November 2008 and from January to April 2014. He had additional service in the reserves. These matters come before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2015 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) at a hearing in February 2020. A copy of the transcript has been reviewed and associated with the claims file. 1. Entitlement to service connection for a left knee disability is remanded; 2. Entitlement to service connection for a right knee disability, including as secondary to a left knee disability, is remanded. The Veteran has been assessed with chondromalacia with osteoarthritis of the left knee and right knee pain. He asserts that his left knee was initially injured during a soccer game during a reserve drill weekend in 2010. His left knee injury caused his right knee pain to develop. Furthermore, he indicated that his physical training and fitness tests for the reserves aggravated his bilateral knee pain. The claims file contains information indicating that the Veteran had additional reserve service from 2001 through 2018. However, the record does not contain these additional active service dates. Accordingly, the Board finds that a remand is necessary in order for the RO to obtain and provide information regarding the Veteran’s periods of active duty, including any ACDUTRA (active duty for training), IDT (inactive duty training), or active duty for special work. Furthermore, following the development of the Veteran’s active service, the Board finds that a VA examination is warranted in order to determine the nature and etiology of his bilateral knee disability, including whether it was incurred during active service and/or whether it was aggravated by his physical training tests for the reserves. The matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Take all necessary steps to verify the Veteran’s period(s) of active duty for training (ACDUTRA), inactive duty training (IDT), or active duty for special work for the period(s) from 2001 to the present. Reserve retirement point sheets are not adequate for this purpose; rather, the specific dates of the Veteran’s ACDUTRA, IDT, or active duty for special work service are required. If this information or documentation is unavailable this fact should be noted and a formal finding of unavailability should be made with notice to the Veteran and his representative and they should be given an opportunity to respond. 2. After completion of #1, schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of his right and left knee disabilities. The claims folder, including a copy of this remand, must be made available to the examiner and such review should be noted in the examination report. The examiner should identify and discuss any right and/or left knee disabilities found on examination and identified during the pendency of this claim (November 2014) and respond to the following: A. Is it at least as likely as not (probability of at least 50 percent) that the Veteran’s right knee disability and/or left knee disability had their onset in and/or are otherwise related to a period of active service? (If there is evidence of symptoms for any condition between two periods of active service, the examiner should state whether it is clear and unmistakable that chronic disability preexisted the subsequent period of service and, if so, whether it is clear and unmistakable that such preexisting disorder was not aggravated during such subsequent service.) B. With regard to the Veteran’s complaints of right knee pain, if there is no diagnosed disability, is it at least as likely as not (a 50 percent probability or more) that any pain reaches the level of a functional impairment of earning capacity? Describe the impairment caused. If so, is it at least as likely as not (a 50 percent probability or more) that this pain had its onset during and/or is otherwise etiologically related to the Veteran’s period(s) of active duty service? C. If service connection is found for a left knee disability, and service connection is not directly found for a right knee disability, is it at least as likely as not (probability of at least 50 percent) that the Veteran’s right knee disability and/or pain was caused by his left knee disability? If not, is it at least as likely as not (probability of at least 50 percent) that his right knee disability and/or pain has been aggravated (any incremental increase in disability) by his left knee disability? If aggravation is found, is there medical evidence created prior to the aggravation or between the aggravation and current level of disability that shows a baseline of his right knee disability prior to aggravation? If so, describe. (Continued on the next page)   The examiner must provide a comprehensive rationale for each opinion provided. Specifically, the examiner should discuss the Veteran’s assertions contained in his hearing testimony and September 2016 statement indicating that he injured his left knee during a soccer game and that his bilateral knee pain was aggravated by his physical training in the reserves. The examiner is advised that the Veteran is competent to report his symptoms and history, and such reports are to be considered in formulating any opinion. If any opinion cannot be given without resorting to speculation, the examiner should explain why and state whether the need to speculate is due to a deficiency in the state of general medical knowledge (no one could respond given medical science and the known facts), the record (additional facts are required), or the examiner does not have the knowledge or training. As appropriate, the AOJ should conduct additional development or supplement the record. Eric S. Leboff Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board S. (Hurley) Merrick 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.