Citation Nr: A21017378 Decision Date: 10/27/21 Archive Date: 10/27/21 DOCKET NO. 200515-83796 DATE: October 27, 2021 REMANDED Whether new and relevant evidence has been presented or secured to warrant readjudication of a previously denied claim for service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded. Whether new and relevant evidence has been presented or secured to warrant readjudication of a previously denied claim for service connection for headaches is remanded. Whether new and relevant evidence has been presented or secured to warrant readjudication of a previously denied claim for service connection for a right shoulder disability is remanded. Whether new and relevant evidence has been presented or secured to warrant readjudication of a previously denied claim for service connection for hypertension is remanded. Whether new and relevant evidence has been presented or secured to warrant readjudication of a previously denied claim for service connection for a left knee disability is remanded. Whether new and relevant evidence has been presented or secured to warrant readjudication of a previously denied claim for service connection for a left ankle disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from February 1974 to December 1980. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2020 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office. The Veteran appealed to the Board in May 2020, requesting direct review of the evidence considered by the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ). 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.201, 20.202(b)(1). The Board notes that evidence was added to the claims file after the record on appeal closed in April 2020. As the Board is remanding the Veteran's claims for further development, the additional evidence will be considered by the AOJ in the readjudication of his claims. 1. Whether new and relevant evidence has been presented or secured to warrant readjudication of a previously denied claim for service connection for PTSD is remanded. 2. Whether new and relevant evidence has been presented or secured to warrant readjudication of a previously denied claim for service connection for headaches is remanded. 3. Whether new and relevant evidence has been presented or secured to warrant readjudication of a previously denied claim for service connection for a right shoulder disability is remanded. 4. Whether new and relevant evidence has been presented or secured to warrant readjudication of a previously denied claim for service connection for hypertension is remanded. 5. Whether new and relevant evidence has been presented or secured to warrant readjudication of a previously denied claim for service connection for a left knee disability is remanded. 6. Whether new and relevant evidence has been presented or secured to warrant readjudication of a previously denied claim for service connection for a left ankle disability is remanded. Although the Board regrets the additional delay, the Veteran's appeal must be remanded to correct a pre-decisional duty to assist error. In an April 2020 VA Form 20-0995, Supplemental Claim Application, the Veteran reported that he began receiving treatment at the Hampton VA Medical Center (VAMC) beginning in December 1980. However, the earliest record of treatment from Hampton VAMC included in the file is from January 2001. To the extent that they exist, the earlier records of treatment from that facility must be obtained for association with the claims file prior to final adjudication of the Veteran's claims. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c); Sullivan v. McDonald, 815 F.3d 786, 793 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (holding that VA has a duty to assist in obtaining sufficiently identified VA medical records, regardless of their relevance). These matters are REMANDED for the following action: Take action to ensure that all available records of the Veteran's treatment at the Hampton VAMC are associated with the claims file, including, but not limited to, any and all non-electronic (i.e., typed or hand-written) clinical records, progress notes, and/or reports of hospitalization, whether or not they have been archived, following the procedures set forth in 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. Efforts to obtain the evidence should be fully documented and should be discontinued only if it is concluded that the evidence sought does not exist or that further efforts to obtain the evidence would be futile. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(2). The evidence obtained, if any, should be associated with the record. If any of the records sought are not available, the record should be annotated to reflect that fact, and the Veteran and his representative should be notified. DAVID A. BRENNINGMEYER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board R. Kettler, 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.