Citation Nr: 21000237 Decision Date: 01/04/21 Archive Date: 01/04/21 DOCKET NO. 16-54 525 DATE: January 4, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 10 percent for left knee chondromalacia is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Navy from December 2011 to March 2012. In October 2019, the Veteran testified at a videoconference hearing before the undersigned. A transcript of the hearing has been associated with the claims file. The Board previously remanded this claim in October 2019. Unfortunately, there has not been substantial compliance with the Board’s previous remand directives. Therefore, another remand is required. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 10 percent for left knee chondromalacia is remanded. The October 2019 Board remand directed that outstanding VA and private medical treatment records be obtained and associated with the claims file with any necessary assistance from the Veteran. Then, the Veteran was to be scheduled for a VA examination. The record includes a November 25, 2019 letter to the Veteran requesting she complete and return a VA Form 21-4142 authorization to disclose information to the Department of Veterans Affairs and VA Form 21-4142a General Release for Medical Provider Information to the Department of Veterans Affairs. The record does not include a response to this letter from the Veteran that includes completed forms. However, the record includes a photocopy of a compact disk (CD) received November 27, 2019. Additionally, imaging of the Veteran’s knee was added to the record on November 27, 2019 and December 18, 2019. It is unclear whether the contents of the November 27, 2019 CD are of record. Furthermore, at the time of the hearing the Veteran stated that a private doctor, Dr. G., had examined her knee and noted she only had active flexion of 30 degrees. She noted she last saw him on October 3, 2019, and that she had brought the records with her. Relevant private treatment notes from Dr. V. were also discussed at the hearing. The Veteran also explained at the hearing that prior attempts by the Regional Office to obtain the records were not successful because a fee was required to process the request for records. A March 2018 report of contact confirms that the providers would not provide the records without payment. Considering private treatment records may still be missing and efforts to obtain the records after the prior remand were not documented in the claims file as directed, remand is necessary to obtain the records. The matter is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. With any necessary assistance from the Veteran, obtain and associate with the claims file any outstanding VA and private medical treatment records, including from Drs. V. and G. All efforts to obtain such records, including documentation of an October 3, 2019, examination with Dr. G., should be documented in the claims file. It is noted that the records previously would not be provided to the VA without payment and that the Veteran indicated she had copies of the records that she would be able to provide. 2. Undertake any additional development as a result of the above. 3. Then, readjudicate the claim based on the entirety of the evidence. If the claim remains denied, issue the Veteran a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) and allow an appropriate period for response before returning the matter to the Board for further appellate adjudication. L. CHU Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board R. Vemulapalli 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.