Citation Nr: 21008384 Decision Date: 02/16/21 Archive Date: 02/16/21 DOCKET NO. 17-60 747 DATE: February 16, 2021 ORDER New and material evidence having been presented, reopening of the claim for service connection for a right knee disability is granted. REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a right knee disability is remanded. INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from October 1992 to October 1996. In February 2021, the Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge at a virtual hearing. The Veteran previously submitted a claim for entitlement to service connection for a right knee disability which was denied in a July 1997 rating decision on the basis that the Veteran’s claim was not well grounded. The July 1997 rating decision became final because the Veteran did not timely appeal the claim within the appeal period. In connection with the Veteran’s claim to reopen, she has submitted ongoing outpatient treatment records from the Atlanta VAMC which show clicking on McMurray’s testing, indicative of a meniscus injury. Thus, the Board finds that new and material evidence has been received sufficient to reopen her previously denied claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.156 (a); Shade v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 110, 117-18 (2010); Justus v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 510, 513 (1992). REASONS FOR REMAND Missing Records Initially, the Board notes the Veteran has reported receiving outpatient treatment at the Oakwood VA. A review of the record shows treatment reports as recent as April 2017, and the Veteran has asserted ongoing treatment since that time. Moreover, the available Atlanta VAMC records show the Veteran was scheduled to undergo outsourced MRI testing in 2014, but that record has not been obtained and associated with the Veteran’s electronic file. Pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (c)(2), VA must make as many requests as are necessary to obtain records in the custody of a Federal department or agency. Since these missing records will likely bear upon the Veteran’s claim, this issue cannot be decided at this time. Service Connection Claims Next, the Board notes that VA must provide a medical examination or obtain a medical opinion when there is (1) competent evidence of a current disability or persistent or recurrent symptoms of a disability, (2) evidence establishing that an event, injury, or disease occurred in service, or establishing that certain diseases manifested during an applicable presumptive period for which the claimant qualifies, and (3) an indication that the disability or persistent or recurrent symptoms of a disability may be associated with the veteran’s service or with another service-connected disability, but (4) there is insufficient competent medical evidence on file for the Secretary to make a decision on the claim. McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006); see also 38 U.S.C. § 5103A (d)(2), 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (c)(4)(i). The third prong, which requires that the evidence of record “indicate” that the claimed disability or symptoms “may be” associated with the established event, disease or injury is a low threshold. McLendon, 20 Vet. App. at 83. To date, the RO has not obtained a VA medical opinion in response to the Veteran’s right knee disability claim. A review of her service treatment records shows she initially injured her right knee after falling from a tank in February 1995. These records show she continued to receive ongoing treatment for her right knee in July 1995, October 1995, November 1995, December 1995, January 1996, and June 1996. During her July 1996 separation examination, the Veteran reported experiencing painful joints and a trick/locked knee. As noted above, the Veteran’s outpatient treatment reports from the Atlanta VAMC show ongoing reports of knee pain and subluxation, as well as a positive McMurray’s test in December 2014. Based on the foregoing, the Board finds a VA examination and medical opinion is necessary to address this issue. Accordingly, this matter is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Undertake appropriate development to obtain any outstanding records pertinent to the Veteran’s claim, to specifically include the results of her outsourced 2014 MRI test, as well as any ongoing treatment records from the Oakwood VA from April 2017 to present. If any requested records are not available, the record should be annotated to reflect such and the Veteran notified in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (e). 2. Then, afford the Veteran a VA examination by an examiner with sufficient expertise to address the etiology of the Veteran’s claimed right knee disability. All pertinent evidence of record must be made available to and reviewed by the examiner. Any indicated studies should be performed. Following a review of the relevant records and lay statements, the examiner should state an opinion with respect to whether any diagnosed right knee disability at least as likely as not (a 50 percent probability or greater) originated during her period of active service or is otherwise etiologically related to her active service. The examiner must specifically address the Veteran’s reports relative to the etiology of the claimed disability. The examiner must also consider and expressly discuss the Veteran’s treatment for right knee manifestations in service in July 1995, October 1995, November 1995, December 1995, January 1996, and June 1996. If the examiner is unable to provide any required opinion, he or she should explain why. If the examiner cannot provide an opinion without resorting to mere speculation, he or she shall provide a complete explanation as to why this is so. T. REYNOLDS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board G. Fraser, 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.