Citation Nr: 21076856 Decision Date: 12/28/21 Archive Date: 12/28/21 DOCKET NO. 18-14 838 DATE: December 28, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a left knee disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from June 1968 to March 1970. This matter is on appeal from a January 2015 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) regional office (RO). The Veteran had a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in September 2021. A transcript has been associated with the file. The Board notes that the Veteran has been in receipt of a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) since August 2006. Thus, even if service connection were to be granted for his left knee, it is unlikely to result in a higher monetary award. The Veteran undeniably has a left knee disability which has received treatment over the years, with a total left knee replacement in June 2018. The Veteran's entrance examination notes the Veteran had previously fractured his knee prior to service. However, while in his November 2017 hearing, the Veteran stated it was his right knee that was injured which caused him to place more stress on his left knee, in his September 2021 hearing, the Veteran stated it was his left knee that was fractured prior to service. Therefore, upon remand, it is necessary to obtain a medical finding as to which knee was injured prior to service. The Veteran's service treatment records (STRs) do not indicate any ongoing treatment for a knee problem. However, in his September 2021 hearing, the Veteran said when he joined service, he injured his knee while in Pearl Harbor in July or August 1969. The Veteran reported he fell off a gang plank, further injuring his knee. The Veteran said he didn't seek medical treatment until it got really severe and got worse and worse until 2018 when he had a knee replacement. The Veteran said he didn't remember if he saw a doctor when he injured his knee in service. This account has remained consistent from other statements made by the Veteran about what happened to him while in service. (See e.g. November 2017 hearing transcript.) The Veteran has not yet been afforded an examination as to the etiology of his current knee disability. The Board finds that given the evidence in the Veteran's record and the Veteran's statements about what happened while in service, an examination is warranted as his records do indicate treatment for his left knee as early as 1975, just five years after his separation from service. McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. The AOJ should obtain any of the Veteran's outstanding medical records and associate them with the claims file. If possible, the Veteran himself should submit any pertinent evidence regarding the condition at issue in order to expedite the claim. 2. Schedule the Veteran for an appropriate VA examination for his left knee disability. The record, to include a copy of this Remand, must be made available to and be reviewed by the examiner. The examiner should opine as to the following: (a) Which knee was injured prior to service? (b) Whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran's disability was incurred in or due to his time in service. (c) Whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran's disability was aggravated beyond its natural progression by his time in service. The examiner should offer a rationale for any opinion offered. 3. After the requested development has been completed, together with any additional development as may become necessary, readjudicate the Veteran's claim. If the benefit sought on appeal remains denied, issue to the Veteran and the Veteran's representative a supplemental statement of the case and give an opportunity to respond thereto. John J. Crowley Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Snoparsky 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.