Citation Nr: 21014210 Decision Date: 03/11/21 Archive Date: 03/11/21 DOCKET NO. 20-19 186 DATE: March 11, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for right ankle condition is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for left ankle condition is remanded. Entitlement to service connection right knee condition is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for left knee condition is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Air Force from May 1961 to May 1965, with additional periods in the Air Force Reserves. This case comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2018 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). These matters were previously before the Board in May 2020, at which time they were remanded for further development. This appeal has been advanced on the Board’s docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900 (c). 1. Entitlement to service connection for right ankle condition is remanded. 2. Entitlement to service connection for left ankle condition is remanded. 3. Entitlement to service connection right knee condition is remanded. 4. Entitlement to service connection for left knee condition is remanded. Although the Board regrets the delay, it finds that another remand is required before the Board can render an appellate decision in these matters. Pursuant to the May 2020 Board remand, which instructed the RO to obtain an examination and various medical records to include those from VA, a VA examination was obtained in November 2020, with accompanying nexus opinions. Furthermore, the RO made attempts to retrieve any Social Security Administration records and private records from Kaiser Permanente for his claimed conditions, although such attempts yielded no results. See July and August 2020 Medical Treatment Records. See also Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). However, the Board notes that there are no VA treatment records associated with the claims file. A November 2020 correspondence indicates that the Veteran’s file contains an incorrect social security number, with instructions for the RO to obtain any outstanding VA treatment records upon verification of the correct social. The Veteran verified his correct Social Security number in a November 2020 telephone call with VA, and a notation was made in his file with the proper number. However, there is no indication in the claims file that the RO tried to obtain any outstanding VA records upon confirmation of the correct social security number; instead a Supplemental Statement of the Case was issued and the claims were returned to the Board. Therefore, it is unclear to the Board whether there are any outstanding VA treatment records following confirmation of the Veteran’s most updated social security number. Any VA treatment records are within VA's constructive possession, and VA has a duty to assist in obtaining sufficiently identified VA medical records regardless of their relevance. See Bell v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 611, 613 (1992); Sullivan v. McDonald, 815 F.3d 786, 793 (Fed. Cir. 2016). Importantly, the Board notes that the November 2020 examiner provided her opinions without reviewing any VA treatment records. See Shipwash v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 218, 222 (1995) (stating that a medical opinion based on incomplete records is of limited probative value). Therefore, on remand, if any outstanding VA treatment records are located and associated with the record, the claims file should be returned to the November 2020 examiner for an addendum report to address any change in her findings based on review of said records. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. The RO should obtain all outstanding VA treatment records, using the Veteran’s confirmed, correct Social Security number. All attempts to fulfill this development should be documented in the claims file. If the search for these records is negative, such should be noted and the Veteran should be informed in writing. 2. If, and only if, new VA treatment records are obtained and associated with the record, return the file to the examiner who authored the November 2020 examination reports, for the purposes of an addendum opinion that takes into account the previously-absent records. The examiner is asked to review the newly associated records and opine as to whether there is any change to her prior opinion. (Continued on the next page)   If the November 2020 examiner is not available, the record should be provided to another medical professional so as to render the requested opinion. JEREMY J. OLSEN Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Y. Asfaw, 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.