Citation Nr: 21074136 Decision Date: 12/14/21 Archive Date: 12/14/21 DOCKET NO. 19-00 564 DATE: December 14, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a right knee disorder is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a left knee disorder is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from March 1966 to April 1969. The Veteran filed an untimely Substantive Appeal in response to the October 2018 Statement of the Case (SOC) for these issues. Nevertheless, there is no indication that the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) closed the case for failure to file a timely substantive appeal because the AOJ certified the case to the Board in January 2019. See Percy v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 37, 42-45 (2009). In January 2017, the Veteran requested service connection, in part, for bilateral knee condition. Review of the record shows the Veteran has current diagnoses of bilateral knee joint osteoarthritis and bilateral degenerative arthritis during the appeal period, as noted in an October 2018 VA examination report for knee and lower leg conditions. Review of service personnel records affirm the Veteran's reported in-service parachute jumps during his second period of active service from April 1967 to April 1969, as shown by military occupational specialty (MOS) as a parachutist and receipt of the parachute badge. Moreover, at the October 2021 videoconference Board hearing, the Veteran reported jumping approximately 22 times during his period of active service and working after separation from service in a steel mill then as a truck driver (shifting without clutch) with no impact on his knees. Following the clinical examination in October 2018, the VA examiner concluded in a VA medical opinion that the Veteran's bilateral knee disorder was less likely than not incurred in or caused by the claimed in-service injury, event, or illness. The rationale provided, in part, that "[t]here is no convincing evidence in the medical [record that the] [V]eteran suffered from accelerated or premature posttraumatic arthritis of the right [and left] knee as related to [MOS] of parachutist with parachute badge during service." The Board finds the VA examiner used the incorrect evidentiary standard for determining a nexus between the currently diagnosed knee disorders with in-service parachute jumps. When VA undertakes to provide a VA medical opinion, it must ensure that the opinion is adequate. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 312 (2007). As a result, the Board finds that an addendum VA medical opinion is needed to properly adjudicate these claims on appeal. The matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Return the Veteran's claims file to the examiner who conducted the October 2018 VA examination for knee and lower leg conditions and provided the October 2018 VA medical opinion for right and left knee disorders so a supplemental opinion may be provided. If that examiner is no longer available, provide the Veteran's claims file to a similarly qualified clinician. The entire claims file and a copy of this remand must be made available to the examiner for review. A new examination (physical or telehealth) is only required if deemed necessary by the examiner. Although an independent review of the claims file is required, the Board calls the examiner's attention to the following: At the October 2021 videoconference Board hearing, the Veteran reported (a) jumping approximately 22 times during his period of active service and (b) working after separation from service in a steel mill then as a truck driver (shifting without clutch) with no impact on his knees. The examiner must provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran's bilateral knee osteoarthritis and degenerative arthritis (i) began during active service, (ii) is related to an incident of service, to include competent and credible assertions of performing approximately 22 parachute jumps (as noted in the October 2021 Board hearing transcript), or (iii) or if symptoms of arthritis began within one year after discharge from active service. Note It is not sufficient to provide an opinion that relies on the premise that the Veteran's in-service parachute jumps did not result in an injury. The examiner must provide all findings, along with a complete rationale for his or her opinion(s) in the examination report. If any of the above requested opinions cannot be made without resort to speculation, the examiner must state this and provide a rationale for such conclusion. 2. Then, review the examination reports and medical opinions to ensure that the requested information was provided. If any report or opinion is deficient in any manner, the AOJ must implement corrective procedures. 3. Then, readjudicate the claims. If any decision is adverse to the Veteran, issue a Supplemental Statement of the Case and allow the applicable time for response. Then, return the case to the Board. D. Martz Ames Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board T. Carter, 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.