Citation Nr: 21076242 Decision Date: 12/22/21 Archive Date: 12/22/21 DOCKET NO. 17-26 887 DATE: December 22, 2021 REMANDED Service connection for a right ankle disorder is remanded. Service connection for a left knee disorder is remanded. Service connection for a right knee disorder is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from September 1968 to September 1970. In February 2020, the Veteran testified before a Veteran Law Judge (VLJ). A copy of the transcript has been associated with the claims file. In September 2020, the Board remanded the appeal for additional development. The case has now been returned to the Board for further appellate action. In a March 2021 letter, VA notified the Veteran that the VLJ he testified before was no longer employed by the Board and notified him of his options. To date, he has not indicated that he wishes to be scheduled for another VA hearing. Thus, there is no bar to proceeding with the appeal. With regard to the Veteran's claim for a right ankle disorder, he was afforded a VA examination in November 2020. In the examination report, the examiner diagnoses the Veteran with a right ankle disorder unspecified, and notes that it is aggravated by his service-connected left ankle disorder. However, the examiner also later opines that there is no chronic diagnosis of the right ankle, and thus, no secondary service connection opinion can be given. As these findings are inherently contradictory to one another, an addendum opinion must be obtained. With regard to the Veteran's claims for left knee disorder, the November 2020 VA examiner's opinions are likewise inconsistent. First considering the left knee, the examiner found that the Veteran had a diagnosis of left knee arthritis and left knee meniscus tear. These findings are also confirmed by his available treatment records which additionally show left knee arthroscopic surgery and pain. Despite that finding, the examiner goes on to say that he was unable to confirm a current chronic diagnosis and bases the finding of no secondary service connection solely on the absence of a diagnosis. Once again, as these findings are inconsistent, an addendum opinion should be obtained. Finally, considering the Veteran's right knee disorder, he has been diagnosed with arthritis, a total knee replacement and a meniscal tear. He has asserted that his right knee disorder is due to his service-connected left ankle disability, or alternatively, he has testified that the disorders are all interconnected due to overcorrection. As the left knee and right ankle disorders remain pending, they are inextricably intertwined, and remand is necessary. The matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Identify and obtain any outstanding, pertinent, VA and private treatment records and associate them with the claims file. 2. Obtain an addendum opinion to assess the status and etiology of the Veteran's right ankle disorder. The entire claims file should be made available to, and reviewed by, the examiner. Another examination should not be scheduled unless deemed necessary by the examiner. The examiner is then asked to list all relevant right ankle diagnoses and provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) that any right ankle disorder is caused, permanently worsened, or aggravated beyond its natural progression by his left ankle disability. A thorough rationale is required for any opinion rendered. 3. Obtain an addendum opinion to assess the status and etiology of the Veteran's bilateral knee disorders. The entire claims file should be made available to, and reviewed by, the examiner. Another examination should not be scheduled unless deemed necessary by the examiner. The examiner is then asked to list all relevant bilateral knee diagnoses and provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) that any knee disorder is caused, permanently worsened, or aggravated beyond its natural progression by his left ankle disability. (Continued on the next page) A thorough rationale is required for any opinion rendered. If any condition is found to be related to service, the examiner is asked to provide a similar etiological opinion which considers any newly service-connected disabilities with a thorough rationale. SONJA S. AN Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Yacoub, 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.