Citation Nr: 21025205 Decision Date: 04/27/21 Archive Date: 04/27/21 DOCKET NO. 19-38 325 DATE: April 27, 2021 ORDER The appeal seeking to reopen a claim for entitlement to service connection for a right knee disability is granted. The appeal seeking to reopen a claim for entitlement to service connection for a left knee disability is granted. REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a right knee disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a left knee disability is remanded. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The claims for entitlement to service connection for bilateral knee arthritis were last denied in an October 2014 rating decision because there was no evidence linking the Veteran’s respective disabilities to military service. The Veteran did not submit new and material evidence within one year of that decision or initiate an appeal. The decisions became final. 2. The evidence added to the record since the October 2014 rating decision relates to an unestablished fact that is necessary to substantiate the claims of entitlement to service connection for left and right knee disabilities. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. New and material evidence has been received to reopen the claim of entitlement to service connection for a right knee disability. 38 U.S.C. § 5108; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156 (a). 2. New and material evidence has been received to reopen the claim of entitlement to service connection for a left knee disability. 38 U.S.C. § 5108; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156 (a). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty with the United States Navy from February 1957 to February 1978. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2018 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). New and Material Evidence 1. Whether new and material evidence has been received to reopen a claim for service connection for a right knee disability 2. Whether new and material evidence has been received to reopen a claim for service connection for a left knee disability The Veteran filed his initial claims for service connection for left and right knee disabilities in October 2014. Service connection for those claims were denied in an October 2014 rating decision based on a finding that there was no evidence of a link between the knee disabilities and the Veteran’s service. The Veteran was notified of that decision in an October 2014 notice letter. The Veteran did not submit any additional evidence respecting the claim or a notice of disagreement with the decision within one year of that notice letter. As no timely notice of disagreement or new and material evidence was received during the appeal period following the October 2014 notice letter, the October 2014 rating decision became final. New and material evidence is therefore required to reopen the claims of service connection for left and right knee disabilities. Since the October 2014 rating decision, favorable medical opinions were submitted commenting on the connection between the Veteran’s diagnosed knee disabilities and his military service. Therefore, the Board finds that new and material evidence which tends to substantiate the Veteran’s claims of service connection for left and right knee disabilities has been received in this case, and the claims are reopened. 38 U.S.C. § 5108; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156. REASONS FOR REMAND 1. Entitlement to service connection for a right knee disability is remanded. 2. Entitlement to service connection for a left knee disability is remanded. Having reopened the Veteran’s claims, remand is needed to afford the Veteran a VA examination with opinion on whether any diagnosed knee disability is related to active duty service. The recently submitted medical nexus opinions in the record are not sufficient to decide this claim. Notably, a November 2017 opinion letter the Veteran submitted from a private physician concluded that it is “possible that a component of his knee arthritis may have been precipitated from his work-related activities” in service. This opinion does not indicate whether the Veteran’s duties while in service were at least as likely as not a cause of the current knee disabilities. A November 2019 opinion from another private physician concluded that it is medically probable the Veteran suffered a bilateral knee injury during service, but did not discuss whether or how such an injury is connected to the current right and left knee disabilities. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination for his claimed bilateral knee disabilities. The examiner must identify all diagnoses related to his claimed bilateral knee disabilities. If a diagnosis cannot be provided but the Veteran’s condition manifests in symptoms that cause functional impairment, then the examiner should consider them a “disability” for the purpose of providing the requested opinion below. Following review of the claims file and examination of the Veteran, the examiner should opine whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that any diagnosed knee disability had its onset in or is otherwise related to active duty service. The examiner should specifically address the Veteran’s lay statements regarding the onset and progression of his symptoms. If the examiner determines the current knee disabilities are more likely due to the natural aging process, the examiner must reconcile this conclusion with the November 2019 private opinion indicating that it is reasonable and medically probable that the Veteran suffered a bilateral knee injury due to his in-service duties. The examiner should address any other pertinent evidence of record. All findings must be reported in detail and all opinions must be accompanied by a clear rationale. If any of the above issues cannot be resolved without resorting to speculation, then a detailed medical explanation as to why this is so must be provided. J. Komperda Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board K. Josey, 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.