Citation Nr: 21001370 Decision Date: 01/07/21 Archive Date: 01/07/21 DOCKET NO. 17-17 457 DATE: January 7, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for left knee disability, to include a nerve disability of the left lower extremity, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from December 1966 to December 1969. The matters come before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2012rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In December 2019, the Veteran testified at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A copy of the proceeding is associated with the electronic claims file. This claim was previously remanded by the Board in April 2020 for further development, to include providing VA examinations and updating VA treatment records/updating private treatment records. Unfortunately, there has not been substantial compliance with the Board’s previous remand directives. Another remand is required. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). Entitlement to service connection for left knee disability, to include a nerve disability of the left lower extremity is remanded. The July 2020 VA examination diagnosed the Veteran with polyarthralgia and osteoarthritis of the left knee. The examiner opined against relation to service based solely on a lack of medical records between separation from service and 2005. However, the examiner failed to consider the Veteran’s lay statements of continuity of symptoms since service which he treated with over the counter medications for many years. See December 2019 Board Hearing Transcript. Accordingly, this examination is inadequate. See Dalton v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 23 (2007); Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295, 302-04 (2008). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Obtain an addendum opinion from an appropriate clinician regarding whether the Veteran’s left knee disability, to include a nerve disability of the left lower extremity, is at least as likely as not related to the June 1969 motorcycle accident. The examiner’s attention is drawn to the Veteran’s competent statements that he has experienced pain in his knee since the accident and treated his symptoms with over the counter medications for years prior to obtaining treatment in 2010. The need for additional physical examination of the Veteran is left to the discretion of the examiner. In providing the requested opinion, consider the Veteran’s description of his in-service injury and symptoms as well as his post-service symptoms. If there is any medical reason to accept or reject the proposition that the Veteran’s reported injury and symptoms in service and thereafter represented the onset of his current disability, this should be noted. Stated another way, do the Veteran’s reports about his symptoms align with how the currently diagnosed disability is known to develop or are the Veteran’s reports generally inconsistent with medical knowledge or implausible? The examiner must provide a complete explanation for all opinions. If the examiner is unable to render the requested opinions without resorting to speculation, the examiner must state whether there is inadequate factual information, whether the question falls beyond the knowledge of the examiner, whether the question falls beyond the scope of the medical community, or another reason. Nathaniel J. Doan Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board K.L. Blevins, 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.