Citation Nr: 21032205 Decision Date: 05/26/21 Archive Date: 05/26/21 DOCKET NO. 17-19 976 DATE: May 26, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a left knee disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from July 1988 to October 1988. Following active duty training, the Veteran served in the U.S. Air Force Reserve until January 2004. This matter came before the Board of Veterans Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2016 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veteran's Law Judge during an August 2019 hearing. The transcript of the hearing is of record. A September 2019 Board decision remanded the issue on appeal for further development. Entitlement to service connection for a left knee disorder The September 2019 remand asked that outstanding VA treatment records be obtained. However, the record does not contain documentation of any attempt to obtain outstanding VA treatment records or any finding that the records are either complete or that additional records are unavailable. Remand is therefore required to ensure compliance with the remand directive. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). The September 2019 Board decision also asked for outstanding private records. Specifically, the Board decision referenced treatment records from UT Health Science Center as the Veteran testified she was treated at this facility during the August 2019 hearing. The Board's review indicates that a December 2019 letter asked the Veteran to complete the required authorization, but there is no indication in the record that the Veteran responded to the request. However, as the issue on appeal is being remanded, the Board finds that the Veteran should be afforded an additional opportunity to provide the required authorization. Finally, the September 2019 remand requested a new VA opinion, specifically asking that the examiner address the lay statements of record regarding onset and symptomatology. A February 2020 VA medical opinion found that it was less likely than not that the Veteran's service injury in 1988 resulted in her current left knee disability, stating as a rationale that the Veteran's pain resolved in a week after the injury, the Veteran reported no medical issues for 15 years after her injury, and that the Veteran had similar symptoms in her right knee with similar loss of range of motion. The Board's review indicates, however, that the opinion is silent for any indication that the examiner considered or discussed the April 2017 lay statement as requested in the September 2019 Board decision. Remand is therefore required to obtain the requested opinions. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Ask the Veteran to complete a VA Form 21-4142 for UT Health Science Center and any other private providers who treat her claimed disabilities. Make two requests for the authorized records, unless it is clear after the first request that a second request would be futile. 2. Obtain complete VA treatment records from July 1988 to present. If such records are unavailable, the Veteran's claim file must be clearly documented to that effect and the Veteran notified in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(e). 3. Schedule the Veteran for an appropriate VA examination, to determine the etiology of any current left knee disability. The examiner should review the file and provide a complete rationale for all opinions expressed. For any current left knee disability found to be diagnosed, the examiner should provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that any such disability is related to the Veteran's active service. In providing the opinion, the examiner should consider and discuss any lay statements of record, to include the April 2017 lay statement from a fellow servicemember, and the Veteran's statements regarding the onset and persistence of her symptoms. The claim file should be made available to the examiner for their review and the examination report should state a review of the file was completed. 4. If upon completion of the above action the appeal remains denied, the case should be returned to the Board after compliance with appellate procedures. E. I. VELEZ Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Y. Akkad 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.