Citation Nr: 21015294 Decision Date: 03/17/21 Archive Date: 03/17/21 DOCKET NO. 16-21 804 DATE: March 17, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a right knee disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from September 1971 to July 1974. He served in the Republic of Vietnam during the Vietnam Era and was awarded the Bronze Star and Combat Action Ribbon. The Veteran testified via videoconference before the undersigned at a January 2019 Board Hearing. The claims file contains a transcript of that hearing. By way of history, this matter, in part, was before the Board in July 2019, where the claims for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability, bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, right knee, back, hypertension, and erectile dysfunction were remanded for further evidentiary development. Following the 2019 remand, in an October 2020 rating decision, service connection for the acquired psychiatric disability, bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome, back disability, hypertension, and erectile dysfunction claims were granted. Therefore, these claims are no longer on appeal, though the Veteran is within the one-year time frame to appeal the ratings assigned if he wishes to do so. However, although the Board sincerely regrets the additional delay, another remand is necessary to afford the Veteran due process of law and to ensure that there is a complete record upon which to decide the Veteran’s appeal. As for the Veteran’s claim for service connection for the right knee disability, following the October 2020 Board remand, he was afforded an examination in December 2019. However, the Board finds the 2019 opinion to be conclusory and not probative in value. Specifically, the examiner provided no rationale for the negative opinion or discussed whether the cyst was related to the Veteran’s claims that it was due to his injuries in service. The Board also notes that although the examiner stated the current disability is not due to service, in the examination report, the examiner noted the “details of onset” that: “right knee complaints began when the Veteran injured it while on the ship. He struck his knee on doors and hashes. Later he developed a cyst and it was surgically removed by Dr. [S.A.]. Current symptoms are consistent with the mechanism of Right Knee Disability with report of continued symptoms.” (emphasis added). If the examiner noted that the Veteran’s current symptoms are consistent with his reports from service, the opinion is therefore unclear. Further, the examiner’s opinion was based on the Veteran’s service treatment records not having any reports of knee pain or treatment while in service or at discharge, but the Board notes that the fact the Veteran’s condition was normal at discharge does not preclude service connection being granted for a post-service condition if it is, in fact, related to a service injury. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: Obtain an addendum opinion from the 2019 examiner, or another examiner if that examiner is not available, to address the etiology of the Veteran’s right knee disability. No additional examination of the Veteran is necessary, unless the examiner determines otherwise. The claims file, including a copy of this remand, must be provided to the examiner in conjunction with the requested opinions. Then, the examiner must opine as to the following, with full supporting rationales: whether it is at least as likely as not that the current right knee disability is related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, including bumping the knee on ship hatches and ladders. The Veteran alleges that a cyst he developed shortly after service is related to those injuries and that the cyst caused his current right knee disability and these contentions MUST be considered. If, like the prior 2019 VA examiner concluded, the right knee disability is determined to be unrelated to the Veteran’s service, please identify the etiology for the right knee considered more likely, if medically possible to do so. Rationale must be provided for opinions proffered. If the examiner determines that a requested opinion is not possible without resort to mere speculation, then the examiner must explain why. MICHELLE L. KANE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board G.Hoy, 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.