Citation Nr: 21076380 Decision Date: 12/23/21 Archive Date: 12/23/21 DOCKET NO. 16-12 330 DATE: December 23, 2021 ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for osteoarthritis. REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for osteoarthritis is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served in the Army from February 1980 to December 1980. The record reflects the Veteran had service in the U.S. Army Reserve with periods of active duty for training (ACDUTRA) and inactive duty for training (INACDUTRA). This case comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2014 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Nashville, Virginia. The Veteran was afforded a video conference Board Hearing in March 2019 before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of that hearing is of record. This matter was previously adjudicated by the Board in an August 2019 decision. In that August 2019 decision, the Board denied the Veteran's claims of entitlement to service connection for osteoarthritis, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, rheumatoid arthritis and muscle weakness. The Veteran appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) that part of the Board's April 2019 decision which denied the Veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for osteoarthritis. In a June 2020 Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMPR), the parties (the Veteran and the Secretary of Veterans Affairs) agreed that the August 2019 decision did not contain a sufficient statement of reasons or bases as to whether a VA examination and medical opinion was warranted to determine if a nexus exists between the Veteran's osteoarthritis and her military service. The JMPR was granted by an Order of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) dated in June 2020. See CAVC Order, June 22, 2020. As such, the Board's August 2019 denial of entitlement to service connection for osteoarthritis was vacated and remanded for further proceedings consistent with the JMPR. In October 2020, the Board remanded the Veteran's claim for further development, to include a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of this Veteran's ostearthritis. The matter has returned to the Board for appellate consideration. For reasons that will be explained below, the Board finds that further development on this claim is required prior to adjudication. The Board also acknowledges the Veteran's November 2021 request for an extension. See November 2, 2021 Correspondence (VA Form 27-0820). As the Veteran's claim is being remanded for further development, the Veteran is not prejudiced by proceeding with this claim. Entitlement to service connection for osteoarthritis is remanded. The Veteran asserts that her osteoarthritis resulted from an injury she sustained when she fell off of a truck and injured her back and knees in Fort Stewart, Georgia. Additionally, the Veteran asserts that she has osteoarthritis in her feet due to cold weather, sleeping on the ground in bad weather and marching in boots for long distances during service. See March 2019 Board Hearing transcript re: fall off truck carrying patients, extensive marching in boots, pgs. 6-7. The Board finds that further development on this claim is required for the following reasons: First, in its October 2020 remand, the Board noted that the Veteran had service in the U.S. Army Reserve with periods of active duty for training (ACDUTRA) and inactive duty for training (INACDUTRA). In this case, the RO made a November 2020 request to the National Personnel Records Center for service treatment records, entrance on duty (EOD) and release from active duty (RAD) examinations, line of duty determinations, verification of all periods of active-duty service, including dates which are active duty, and which are active duty for training. See November 18, 2020 VA Correspondence; See also January 4, 2021 Receipt date (copy of correspondence). The Board observes however that there is no indication that service treatment records were obtained with respect to the Veteran's U.S. Army Reserve service, nor was a determination made as to whether the records do not exist or that if further efforts to obtain the records would be futile. The Board notes that the Veteran's Military Personnel records show that the Veteran had an honorable discharge from U.S. Army Reserve service in February 1986. See Military Personnel Records. The Board observes that these records are relevant to the Veteran's claim and could assist the Veteran in substantiating her claim with respect to the onset, or continuity of symptoms, of her disability. The Board does take note that the claims file includes copies of military payment worksheets during the Veteran's Army Reserve Service. See October 2021 DFAS Payment Worksheets (Receipt date: October 12, 2021). To ensure that VA has met its duty to assist, the Board finds that remand is necessary. 38 U.S.C. § 5103A; 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c). Second, the Board notes has been afforded July 2021 VA Back, Knee and Lower Leg condition examinations to determine the nature and etiology of her osteoarthritis. These VA examinations were followed by medical opinions as to the nature and etiology of this Veteran's osteoarthritis. The Board is cognizant that the July VA 2021 examiner rendered a negative nexus opinion to the Veteran's service. See July 15, 2021 VA Examinations and Medical Opinion (dated July 17, 2021). In this case however, the Board noted in its remand directives that after development was completed, the RO was to schedule a VA examination with a medical professional to determine the nature and etiology of this Veteran's osteoarthritis disability. See October 6, 2020 BVA remand, pg. 3 To ensure that the Veteran is afforded every opportunity to substantiate her claim, the Board finds that an addendum medical opinion is warranted contingent of the receipt of additional information (e.g., service treatment records, line of duty determinations, entrance on duty (EOD) and release from active duty (RAD) examinations, pertaining to her service in the U.S. Army Reserve), from the examiner who conducted the July 2021 VA examination, and for that examiner to opine whether this Veteran's osteoarthritis disability is directly linked to the Veteran's active duty service, (ACDUTRA or INACDUTRA) or is otherwise etiologically related to service, based on a review of all information pertinent to this Veteran's claim. Accordingly, this matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain and associate with the claims file any outstanding VA treatment records; and, with appropriate authorization from the Veteran, any additional outstanding private treatment records identified by her as pertinent to her claim. 2. Obtain the Veteran's complete service personnel and service treatment record, including line of duty determinations, entrance on duty (EOD) and release from active duty (RAD) examinations, pertaining to her service in the U.S. Army Reserve. Document all requests for information as well as all responses in the claims file. 3. Notify the Veteran if service personnel records and/or STRs, line of duty determinations, entrance on duty (EOD) and release from active duty (RAD) examinations, are unavailable through official sources and provide her an opportunity to provide copies of those records. All efforts to obtain these records should be fully documented. If records do not exist or further efforts to obtain the records would be futile, notify the Veteran in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (e). 4. Note: If additional information has been received upon completion of the requested development, forward the claims file to the VA examiner who conducted the July 2021 VA Back, Knee and Lower Leg examinations and rendered the subsequent July 2021 medical opinions. If that is examiner is not available, forward the claims file to another medical professional with sufficient expertise to determine the nature and etiology of her claimed osteoarthritis disability. No additional examination is necessary, unless the examiner determines otherwise. The Veteran's complete claims file, to include a copy of this remand, a list of all periods of ACDUTRA and INACDUTRA service, must be made available to the examiner in conjunction with the examination. This review should include the Veteran's service treatment records from the Army Reserves, post-service medical treatment records and the assertions of the Veteran and her representative, along with any other information the examiner deems pertinent. A note that this information was reviewed should be included in the opinion. Following review of all pertinent evidence, the examiner is to provide an addendum opinion as to whether the Veteran has a current osteoarthritis disability (i.e., knees, back, feet, etc.). For each diagnosed condition, whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent or greater probability) that the claimed condition had its onset in service or is directly linked to the Veteran's time on active-duty service, (ACDUTRA or INACDUTRA) or is otherwise etiologically related to service. The absence of evidence of treatment for osteoarthritis (i.e., knees, back, feet) in the Veteran's service treatment records (STRs) cannot, alone, be a sufficient rationale for providing a negative opinion. However, if it is reasonable to expect the Veteran to have complained about or received treatment for this alleged injury while in service, the examiner must discuss why this is a reasonable expectation. The examiner is advised that the Veteran is competent to report her symptoms and history, and these reports must be specifically considered in formulating all opinions. If the examiner rejects the Veteran's reports, the examiner should provide a reason for doing so. 5. After completing the requested actions, and any additional development deemed warranted, readjudicate the Veteran's claim in light of all pertinent evidence and legal authority. If the claim remains denied, a supplemental statement of the case must be provided to the Veteran and her representative. After the Veteran and her representative have had an adequate opportunity to respond, the appeal must be returned to the Board for appellate review. Michael A. Pappas Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board C. Little, 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.