Citation Nr: 22066035 Decision Date: 11/28/22 Archive Date: 11/28/22 DOCKET NO. 18-02 123 DATE: November 28, 2022 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a right ankle disorder is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from August 1975 to August 1978, and from November 2007 to November 2008. In June 2022, the Board previously remanded the current claim for additional development. 1. Entitlement to service connection for a right ankle disorder is remanded. In June 2022, the Board remanded the current claim for the Regional Office (RO) to obtain an adequate VA medical opinion. A VA examination was only required if deemed necessary. Thereafter, the RO scheduled the Veteran for VA examination, which he failed to attend. It was not indicated that such VA examination was, in fact, necessary. The Board observes that while a VA examination may have been helpful in this case, it was not specifically requested. Indeed, the Board's remand only requested that a medical opinion be obtained. Regrettably, as the RO did not comply with the previous remand directives, the Board finds that a remand is required to obtain a VA medical opinion consistent with the directives herein. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). The Board also notes that the June 2022 remand requested that additional development be conducted to obtain the Veteran's complete service treatment records and that the attempts to obtain such records be documented. The record does not otherwise reflect that such development was conducted. As such, remand is warranted for additional development consistent with the directives herein. The matter is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Ensure that all service treatment records from the Veteran's periods of active duty, active duty for training and inactive duty for training have been associated with the claims file, to include any entrance examination for the period of active duty beginning November 2007. If not, attempt to obtain, through all appropriate sources, any outstanding service treatment records. All efforts to obtain these records should be documented. If any records cannot be obtained after reasonable efforts have been made, issue a formal determination that such records do not exist or that further efforts to obtain such records would be futile. This determination should be documented in the claims file and the Veteran must be notified. 2. Obtain a VA medical opinion from an appropriate examiner to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran's right ankle disorder. A physical examination may be scheduled/conducted only if deemed necessary. The claims folder (including a copy of this remand) must be provided to and reviewed by the examiner as part of the examination. a) Based upon the medical and lay evidence of record, is there clear and unmistakable evidence (such that reasonable minds could not differ) that a right ankle disability preexisted the Veteran's second period of active duty service? b) If you determine that the right ankle disability clearly and unmistakably preexisted service, was it clearly and unmistakably not aggravated (i.e., not permanently worsened beyond the natural progression of the disease) during service? Specifically discuss the Veteran's lay statements of observable symptoms during service. c) If it is found that there is clear and unmistakable evidence that the Veteran's right ankle disability existed prior to service AND that there is clear and unmistakable evidence that the condition was not aggravated by service, please clearly indicate the basis/evidence supporting your conclusions. d) If the Veteran's right ankle disability did not preexist service OR it was not aggravated by service, please then opine as to whether it is at least as likely as not (likelihood is at least approximately balanced or nearly equal, if not higher) that the Veteran's right ankle disability is etiologically related to his active duty service? Note: the examiner may not solely base negative findings on a lack of treatment records but must also consider and address the Veteran's subjective lay reports of symptoms in any conclusions rendered. The examination report should specifically state that a review of the record was conducted. The examiner should provide a complete rationale for all opinions provided. If an opinion cannot be provided without to resorting to mere speculation, the examiner should identify all medical and lay evidence considered in this conclusion, fully explain why this is the case and identify what additional evidence (if any) would allow for a more definitive opinion. TRACY O. JOSEPH Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Metzner, Paul 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.