Citation Nr: 18141907 Decision Date: 10/11/18 Archive Date: 10/11/18 DOCKET NO. 12-27 601A DATE: October 11, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder disorder is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a low back disorder is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include posttraumatic stress disorder is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for erectile dysfunction is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from August 1972 to September 1987. With regard to his claim of entitlement to service connection for a low back disorder, the Veteran has asserted that VA’s failure to issue a statement of the case in response to his September 1990 notice of disagreement was “clear and unmistakable error.” In an August 2015 decision, the Board found that the low back disorder on appeal was from an original claim, rather than a claim to reopen. As a result, the claim on appeal for service connection for a low back disorder stems from the December 1989 claim. That same August 2015 Board decision reopened the claim of entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder disorder. Left shoulder and low back disorders In its August 2015 decision, the Board directed that medical opinions addressing the etiology of the claimed left shoulder and low back disorders be obtained. In discussing whether the claimed disorders were related to an inservice injury, the examiner was directed to “specifically address … the Veteran’s contentions regarding the continuity of symptomatology.” In this regard, on examination in February 2012, the Veteran reported a history of left shoulder and low back pain since 1975, which was recurrent for the remainder of his military service, and persisted after discharge. However, the November 2015 VA examiner failed to discuss these lay reports of continuity of symptomatology. Therefore, there has not been substantial compliance with the Board’s previous remand directives and another remand is required. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). Additionally, at the October 2016 Board hearing the Veteran argued that his left shoulder and low back disorders were related to the repetitive physical demands of his active-duty service as an infantryman, and that his left shoulder disorder was caused or aggravated as a result of compensating for his service-connected right shoulder disorder. On remand, medical opinions addressing these contentions must be obtained. A June 2015 letter indicates that the Veteran was in receipt of Social Security disability benefits, but there is no indication that medical records used in awarding those benefits have been requested. As they are potentially relevant to the appeal issues they must be requested. See Golz v. Shinseki¸ 590 F.3d 1317 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (VA has an obligation to secure Social Security records if there is a reasonable possibility that the records would help to substantiate the Veteran’s claim). Acquired psychiatric disorder and erectile dysfunction The Veteran submitted a timely notice of disagreement to a May 2017 rating decision denying entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder and erectile dysfunction, but a statement of the case has not yet been issued. A remand is required for the AOJ to issue a statement of the case. 38 C.F.R. § 20.200; Manlincon v. West, 12 Vet. App. 238, 240-41 (1999). Finally, the Board acknowledges that the appellant has testified before three different Veterans Law Judges. Given the fact that a remand is not a decision, all Veterans Law Judges need not participate in this action. Any final decision, however, will be reviewed and signed by a panel of three. Accordingly, the matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain the Veteran’s medical records from the Social Security Administration. If the RO cannot locate such records, it must specifically document the attempts that were made to locate them, and explain in writing why further attempts to locate or obtain any government records would be futile. The RO must then: (a) notify the claimant of the specific records that it is unable to obtain; (b) explain the efforts VA has made to obtain that evidence; and (c) describe any further action it will take with respect to the claims. The claimant must then be given an opportunity to respond. 2. Thereafter, schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate physician to determine the nature and etiology of any diagnosed left shoulder and low back disorders. The physician must opine whether it is at least as likely as not that any left shoulder disorder diagnosed since December 9, 2009 is related to an in-service injury, including the December 1975 basketball injury and the physical demands of active duty service as an infantryman (that is, an occupation which required heavy lifting, rappelling and extensive marching, running and jumping). The physician must expressly discuss the Veteran’s reports of experiencing continuous left shoulder pain since service. If the examiner has reason to doubt the credibility of this history that reason must be discussed in full. The examiner must also opine whether it is at least as likely as not that any left shoulder disorder diagnosed at any time since December 9, 2009 is proximately due to the appellant’s service-connected right shoulder acromioclavicular arthritis. If not, the examiner must address whether any left shoulder disorder is aggravated beyond its natural progression by right shoulder acromioclavicular arthritis. The examiner must discuss the Veteran’s October 2016 hearing testimony that he compensated for his right shoulder limitation with his left shoulder. The examiner must also opine whether it is at least as likely as not that any low back disorder diagnosed since December 5, 1989 is at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, including the December 1975 basketball injury, the August 1976 service treatment note of low back pain and a back injury three years prior, the February 1986 note of chronic back pain for two days, and the physical demands of active duty service as an infantryman (that is, an occupation which required heavy lifting, rappelling and extensive marching, running, and jumping). The physician must expressly discuss the Veteran’s reports of experiencing continuous left shoulder pain since service. If the examiner has reason to doubt the credibility of this history that reason must be discussed in full. A complete, well-reasoned rationale must be provided for any opinion offered. If the requested opinion cannot be rendered without resorting to speculation, the examiner must state whether the need to speculate is caused by a deficiency in the state of general medical knowledge, i.e., no one could respond given medical science and the known facts, or by a deficiency in the record or the examiner, i.e., additional facts are required, or the examiner does not have the needed knowledge or training. 3. Send the Veteran and his representative a statement of the case that addresses the issues of entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder and erectile dysfunction. If, and only if, the Veteran perfects a timely appeal should these issues should be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration. DEREK R. BROWN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Paul J. Bametzreider, Associate Counsel