Citation Nr: 21000092 Decision Date: 01/04/21 Archive Date: 01/04/21 DOCKET NO. 19-37 770 DATE: January 4, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for B cell lymphoma due to exposure to herbicides and/or asbestos, claimed as multiple myeloma due to exposure to asbestos, is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for left knee degenerative arthritis, to include as secondary to service-connected left hip disability, claimed as left knee condition, is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for right knee degenerative arthritis, to include as secondary to service-connected left hip disability, claimed as right knee condition, is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for right hip disability, to include as secondary to service-connected left hip disability, claimed as right hip injury, is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for chronic low back disability with degenerative joint disease, to include as secondary to service-connected left hip disability, claimed as lower back condition, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from August 1958 to May 1962. Unfortunately, the Veteran died in February 2016. The appellant is the Veteran’s surviving spouse and is a properly substituted party. See December 2016 letter to the appellant. These matters come before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2015 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In the August 2016 rating decision, the RO granted a higher initial evaluation of 10 percent for left hip disability, effective July 31, 2015. In the Notice of Disagreement received in March 2016, the Veteran asserted that the effective date for the 10 percent initial evaluation for left hip disability should be February 2014, the date of his original claim of entitlement to service connection for left hip disability. The Veteran did not disagree with the 10 percent rating assigned for the left hip disability. In an August 2019 rating decision, the RO granted entitlement to an earlier effective date for left hip disability and assigned a February 13, 2014 effective date. As the assignment of the February 2014 effective date represents a full grant of the benefits sought on appeal, the AOJ did not further adjudicate the issue in the October 2019 Statement of the Case, and thus the issue is not before the Board. The August 2015 rating decision treated the issues of entitlement to service connection for right hip disability, left knee degenerative arthritis, right knee degenerative arthritis, and chronic low back disability with degenerative joint disease, all to include as secondary to service-connected left hip disability, as petitions to reopen. However, since the December 2006 administrative decision which denied entitlement to service connection for such disabilities, new and relevant military personnel records were associated with the record. Except as otherwise provided, if at any time following issuance of a decision VA receives or associates with the claims file relevant official service department records that existed and had not been associated with the claims file when VA first decided a prior claim, VA will reconsider the claim. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.156 (c), 20.1000(b). By operation of § 3.156(c), an original claim is not just reopened, it is reconsidered and serves as the date of the claim and the earliest date for which benefits may be granted. Stowers v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 550, 554 (2014). Accordingly, the Board considers the issues of entitlement to service connection for right hip disability, left knee degenerative arthritis, right knee degenerative arthritis, and chronic low back disability with degenerative joint disease, all to include as secondary to service-connected left hip disability, to be original claims. Thus, the Veteran’s right hip disability, left knee degenerative arthritis, right knee degenerative arthritis, and chronic low back disability with degenerative joint disease, all to include as secondary to service-connected left hip disability appeals are being reconsidered de novo on the merits and new and material evidence analysis is not necessary. See 38 U.S.C. § 5108 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(c). 1. Entitlement to service connection for B cell lymphoma due to exposure to herbicides and/or asbestos, is remanded. 2. Entitlement to service connection for left knee degenerative arthritis, to include as secondary to service-connected left hip disability, is remanded. 3. Entitlement to service connection for right knee degenerative arthritis, to include as secondary to service-connected left hip disability, is remanded. 4. Entitlement to service connection for right hip disability, to include as secondary to service-connected left hip disability, is remanded. 5. Entitlement to service connection for chronic low back disability with degenerative joint disease, to include as secondary to service-connected left hip disability, is remanded. Regarding all issues on appeal, a February 2006 Veteran’s Application for Compensation and/or Pension, VA Form 21-526 shows that the Veteran asserted that he is receiving disability benefits from the Social Security Administration (SSA). An August 2015 SSA inquiry indicates that the Veteran receives benefits from the SSA, and that his disability onset date is July 27, 1978. There is no indication in the record that VA has sought to obtain the Veteran’s Social Security Administration disability records. VA must attempt to obtain relevant records from a Federal department or agency unless further attempts would be futile. These records include medical and other records from the SSA. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (c)(2). In Murincsak v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 363, 370 (1992), the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) found that VA’s duty to assist specifically includes requesting information from other Federal departments. In Baker v. West, 11 Vet. App. 163, 169(1998), the CAVC further stated that VA is required to obtain evidence from other agencies, including decisions of the SSA. Therefore, the Board finds that remand is necessary to obtain any outstanding SSA records. Regarding the medical evidence for all issues on appeal, additional development is required. The Veteran had a VA examination for hip and thigh conditions in February 2015. The Veteran had an additional VA examination for hip and thigh conditions, and VA examinations for back conditions and for knee and lower leg conditions in July 2015. The February 2015 VA examination for hip and thigh conditions did not address the Veteran’s right hip disability. The July 2015 VA examination for knee and lower leg conditions did not provide a direct or secondary opinion for the Veteran’s right knee disability. The July 2015 VA examination for hip and thigh, back and knee conditions did not provide direct or secondary opinions regarding aggravation of the Veteran’s right hip disability, back disability and left knee disabilities by his service-connected left hip disability. A medical opinion as to secondary service connection should address both causation and aggravation. See El-Amin v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 136, 140 (2013). Thus, the Board cannot make fully-informed decisions on the issues of entitlement to service connection for bilateral knee degenerative arthritis, right hip disability, and/or chronic low back disability with degenerative joint disease, all to include as secondary to service-connected left hip disability, because the necessary opinions have not been obtained. Thus, the medical evidence of record is incomplete, and the appeals must be remanded to obtain the necessary addendum opinions. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain the Veteran’s federal records from the Social Security Administration, to include all claims, medical evidence and disability determinations. Document all requests for information as well as all responses in the claims file. 2. Obtain the following addendum opinions from the VA examiner who performed the July 2015 VA examinations for hip and thigh, knee and lower leg, and back conditions, or if that VA examiner is unavailable, from another medical examiner. The examiner must review the claims file. The examiner is asked to provide a response to the following regarding any left knee disability: (a.) Whether it is ast least as likely as not (i.e, 50 percent or greater probability) that any left knee disability is related to an in-service injury, event or disease, including the May 1959 in-service fall documented in the Veteran’s service treatment records (STRs). (b.) Whether any identified left knee arthritis documented by x-ray evidence at least as likely as not (1) began during active service, (2) manifested within one year after discharge from service, or (3) was noted during service with continuity of the same symptomatology since service. (c.) Whether it is at least as likely as not that any left knee disability at least as likely as not proximately due to service-connected left hip disability? (d.) Whether it is at least as likely as not that any left knee disability was aggravated, i.e., worsened beyond its natural progression, by his service-connected left hip disability? The examiner is asked to provide a response to the following regarding any right knee disability: (a.) Whether it is ast least as likely as not (i.e, 50 percent or greater probability) that any right knee disability is related to an in-service injury, event or disease, including the May 1959 in-service fall documented in the Veteran’s service treatment records (STRs). (b.) Whether any identified right knee arthritis documented by x-ray evidence at least as likely as not (1) began during active service, (2) manifested within one year after discharge from service, or (3) was noted during service with continuity of the same symptomatology since service. (c.) Whether it is at least as likely as not that any right knee disability at least as likely as not proximately due to service-connected left hip disability? (d.) Whether it is at least as likely as not that any right knee disability was aggravated, i.e., worsened beyond its natural progression, by his service-connected left hip disability? The examiner is asked to provide a response to the following regarding any right hip disability: (a.) Whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e, 50 percent or greater probability) that any right hip disability is related to an in-service injury, event or disease, including the May 1959 in-service fall documented in the Veteran’s service treatment records (STRs). (b.) Whether it is at least as likely as not that any right hip disability at least as likely as not proximately due to service-connected left hip disability? (c.) Whether it is at least as likely as not that any right hip disability was aggravated, i.e., worsened beyond its natural progression, by his service-connected left hip disability? The examiner is asked to provide a response to the following regarding the chronic low back disability with degenerative joint disease: (a.) Whether it is ast least as likely as not (i.e., 50 percent or greater probability) that any chronic low back disability with degenerative joint disease is related to an in-service injury, event or disease, including the May 1959 in-service fall documented in the Veteran’s service treatment records (STRs). (b.) Whether any identified chronic low back disability with degenerative joint disease documented by x-ray evidence at least as likely as not (1) began during active service, (2) manifested within one year after discharge from service, or (3) was noted during service with continuity of the same symptomatology since service. (c.) Whether it is at least as likely as not that any chronic low back disability with degenerative joint disease is at least as likely as not proximately due to service-connected left hip disability? (d.) Whether it is at least as likely as not that any chronic low back disability with degenerative joint disease was aggravated, i.e., worsened beyond its natural progression, by his service-connected left hip disability? The Board requests that the examiner to provide a detailed discussion of the facts and medical principles involved for each opinion provided. Jennifer White Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Susan Leary, Associate Counsel 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.