Citation Nr: 21002262 Decision Date: 01/13/21 Archive Date: 01/13/21 DOCKET NO. 16-56 399 DATE: January 13, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a left hip disorder, to include as secondary to service-connected left knee tendonitis and/or lumbar strain, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Navy from July 1996 to October 2006. These matters come before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2016 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In February 2020 the Veteran appeared with his representative for a videoconference Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. The claim was previously remanded in April 2020 for additional development. It has since been returned to the Board for further appellate consideration. In an October 2020, the RO granted service connection for post-traumatic arthrosis of the pip joint, right hand little finger, effective January 6, 2016. The RO noted that this was a considered a full grant of the benefits on appeal. The Veteran has not expressed disagreement with this rating decision. The October 2020 rating decision represents a full grant of the benefits sought, and the issues are no longer in appellate status. See Grantham v. Brown, 114 F. 3d 1156, 1158 (Fed. Cir. 1997). 1. Entitlement to service connection for a left hip disorder, to include as secondary to service-connected left knee tendonitis and/or lumbar strain is remanded. Remand is required for substantial compliance with the prior April 2020 Board remand. The Board is obligated by law to ensure that the RO complies with its directives. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). RO compliance with remand directives is not optional or discretionary and the Board errs as a matter of law when it fails to ensure remand compliance. Stegall, 11 Vet. App. at 271. The RO did not fully comply with the Board’s prior remand directives. In the April 2020 remand, the Board requested the RO obtain a VA examination and opinion, directing the examiner to opine if the Veteran’s left hip disorder has onset during service, to include if it was caused or aggravated by the Veteran’s service-connected left knee disorder and/or lumbar strain. The RO failed to obtain a VA examination and opinion regarding if the Veteran’s left hip disorder was caused or aggravated by the Veteran’s service-connected left knee tendonitis. As such has not been accomplished remand is once again necessary. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Obtain addendum opinions regarding the etiology of the left hip disorder from a VA examiner. The entire claims file must be made available to and be reviewed by the examiner. If an examination is deemed necessary, one must be provided. An explanation for all opinions expressed must be provided. First, the examiner must provide an opinion regarding whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the left hip strain had onset, or is otherwise related to, active service. Second, the examiner must provide an opinion regarding whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the left hip strain was caused or aggravated by the Veteran’s service-connected left knee tendonitis. Third, the examiner must provide an opinion regarding whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the left hip strain was caused or aggravated by the Veteran’s service-connected lumbar strain. The examiner must address the following: 1) the Veteran’s lay statements of continuous symptoms since service; 2) the February 2020 Board hearing testimony, including his testimony describing his in-service duties working as a firefighter; 3) the March 2016 VA examination for service-connected lumbar strain which noted the Veteran reported a member of the in-service firefighting team he slipped down some stairs due to a wet floor. K. MILLIKAN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Braxton, 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.