Citation Nr: 21014818 Decision Date: 03/15/21 Archive Date: 03/15/21 DOCKET NO. 16-11 857 DATE: March 15, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for patellofemoral syndrome of the left knee is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for patellofemoral syndrome of the right knee is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for left shin splint is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for right shin splint is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from November 1989 to February 1993. For his meritorious service, the Veteran was awarded (among other decorations) the Southwest Asia Service Medal with three Bronze Stars and the Kuwait Liberation Medal. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a September 2014 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In February 2019, the Veteran testified at a video conference hearing held before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of this hearing has been added to the record. In May 2019, the Board remanded this matter for additional evidentiary development. 1. Entitlement to service connection for patellofemoral syndrome of the left knee. 2. Entitlement to service connection for patellofemoral syndrome of the right knee. 3. Entitlement to service connection for left shin splint. 4. Entitlement to service connection for right shin splint. Previously, the Board remanded the Veteran’s claim in order to obtain an examination and opinion for his claimed bilateral knee and leg disabilities. Though such an examination was obtained, the Board finds the January 2020 VA examiner’s opinions concerning the etiology of the Veteran’s bilateral shin splints and patellofemoral syndrome of the knees to be inadequate. Specifically, the rationale provided by the VA examiner cited the absence of any in-service complaints of or treatment for any knee or shin disabilities. Upon closer review, an October 1991 in-service treatment report noted the Veteran’s complaints of a stiff left knee when going up and down stairs. Given the Veteran’s contentions that his bilateral knee and shin disabilities are related to his repeatedly climbing up and down ladders during service, a new medical opinion should be obtained herein. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). The Board further notes that there is a substantial gap between the Veteran’s discharge from military service and his first post service complaints of or treatment for his bilateral knee and shin disabilities. Under the circumstances of this case, the Veteran should be given a final opportunity to identify any medical treatment providers he may have seen for these disabilities from February 1993 to April 2014. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Ask the Veteran to provide the names and addresses of all medical care providers who have treated him for his claimed disabilities from February 1993 to April 2014. After securing any necessary releases, request any relevant records identified. If any requested records are unavailable, the Veteran should be notified of such. 2. Obtain an addendum opinion from an appropriate clinician regarding whether the Veteran’s patellofemoral syndrome of the right and left knees, and his right and left shin splints are at least as likely as not related to his military service. For each disability. including his patellofemoral syndrome of the right and left knees, and his right and left shin splints, the examiner is asked to provide a response to the following: Is the disability at least as likely as not related to service, including his in-service duties involving repetitively going up and down stairs and ladders? (Continued on next page) The examiner must provide a rationale to support the opinions. In doing so, the examiner must consider the Veteran’s contentions herein, as well as his inservice complaints of left knee stiffness in October 1991. Evan M. Deichert Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board W. Yates, 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.