Citation Nr: 21041290 Decision Date: 07/08/21 Archive Date: 07/08/21 DOCKET NO. 16-19 654 DATE: July 8, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a left knee disorder is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from May 1966 to December 1969. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2015 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In July 2019, the Veteran testified at a Board hearing before a Veterans Law Judge who is no longer employed at the Board. A transcript of the hearing is associated with the record. In May 2021, the Veteran was notified that the Veterans Law Judge who conducted the July 2019 hearing was no longer employed at the Board and afforded him the opportunity to testify at another hearing; however, he declined such opportunity the following month. In September 2019, the Board remanded the issue on appeal for additional development and it now returns for further appellate review. In January 2020, the Board remanded the claims of entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II, and a left lower leg disorder for additional development; however, the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) has not yet readjudicated the claims or recertified them to the Board. As the AOJ may still be taking action on these issues, the Board will not accept jurisdiction over them at this time, but they will be the subject of a subsequent Board decision, if otherwise in order. Entitlement to service connection for a left knee disorder. At his July 2019 Board hearing, the Veteran testified that his left knee disorder developed as a result of an in-service injury aboard the U.S.S. Constellation. Specifically, he reported that he and another service member lifted a 400-pound Shrike missile and, when turning to place the missile onto a skid, the other service member dropped his end of the missile, causing the entire weight to fall onto the Veteran who twisted and dislocated his kneecap. In this regard, the Veteran's service treatment records (STRs) reflect that he twisted his left knee while working in September 1966 and twisted it again in April 1969, at which time he was diagnosed with a mild knee strain. His December 1969 separation examination also reflects his report of sustaining a left knee injury during service. Post-service VA treatment records reflect that the Veteran has reported left knee pain since 2007. In this regard, a June 2007 treatment record notes "occasional DJD [degenerative joint disease] symptoms left knee." While it does not appear x-rays were done to confirm this provisional diagnosis, "DJD of knee" is included on the list of active problems in the Veteran's VA treatment records since June 2007. Further, in an unrelated September 2015 VA examination, the Veteran reported having severely injured his knee in service and thus could not pursue a career in sports, which he excelled in prior to his military service. Similarly, a June 2019 letter from the Veteran's private mental health clinician notes that she saw the Veteran for four visits in 2015 and reported that, at such time, he stated he injured his knee in service while lifting a missile, and his aspirations of playing baseball in the major leagues were dashed by such injury. See J.H. letter. Pursuant to the September 2019 remand, the Veteran was afforded a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of his left knee disorder. In November 2020, after a review of the record, interview with the Veteran, and physical examination, the VA examiner determined he did not have a current left knee disability as the examination revealed a clinically normal left knee. She further noted that the Veteran had no functional loss or impairment due to his left knee, and it did not impact his ability to perform occupational tasks. However, while the examiner recorded the Veteran's report that he had experienced left knee pain since service, she did not address the June 2007 possible diagnosis of DJD of the left knee or whether such symptoms resulted in functional impairment of earning capacity in light of his reports that he could not pursue a career in professional sports due to his left knee. Thus, a remand is necessary in order to obtain an addendum opinion addressing such matters. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Forward the record, to include a copy of this remand, to an appropriate VA examiner so as to obtain an addendum opinion addressing the nature and etiology of the Veteran's claimed left knee disorder. Following a review of the record, the examiner should address the following inquiries: (A) Identify all current left knee disorders that have been present at any time proximate to his June 2015 claim, even if such is asymptomatic or resolved. If the examiner finds that the Veteran does not have such a disorder, he or she should reconcile such determination with the notation of DJD in his VA treatment records beginning in June 2007. If, upon review, the examiner finds that the diagnosis of DJD was in error, he or she should offer an opinion as to whether the Veteran's left knee symptomatology results in functional impairment of earning capacity, to include in light of his report that he could not pursue professional sports due to such complaints. If such functional impairment exists, the examiner is advised that the Veteran has a current disability of the left knee for the purpose of the instant claim. (B) For each left knee disability identified, the examiner should offer an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e., a 50 percent or greater probability) that such disorder had its onset in, or is otherwise related to, the Veteran's military service, to include his left knee injuries documented in September 1966 and April 1969 STRs. In offering such opinion, the examiner must consider and discuss the lay statements of record regarding the onset of the Veteran's left knee disorder and the continuity of symptomatology of such disorder. He or she is advised that the lack of post-service treatment records demonstrating a continuity of care cannot form the sole basis of a negative opinion. (B) If a diagnosis of DJD of the left knee is rendered, offer an opinion as to whether such manifested within one year of the Veteran's separation from active duty in December 1969 (i.e., by December 1970). If so, please describe the manifestations. A rationale for any opinion offered should be provided. A. JAEGER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board J. M. Kelly, 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.