Citation Nr: 21063253 Decision Date: 10/13/21 Archive Date: 10/13/21 DOCKET NO. 17-25 030 DATE: October 13, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a left wrist disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Army from April 2011 to May 2012, to include service in Kyrgyzstan/Afghanistan. He also had service in the Army National Guard, to include a period of active duty for training from February 2009 to July 2009. His decorations include the National Defense Service Medal and the Afghanistan Campaign Medal. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a September 2015 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Phoenix, Arizona. In July 2021, the Veteran testified at a virtual Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of that hearing has been associated with the record. Entitlement to service connection for a left wrist disability is remanded. The Veteran seeks to establish service connection for a left wrist disability. He asserts that he injured his left wrist while engaged in personal physical training during service. Although the Board sincerely regrets the additional delay, a remand is necessary to ensure that there is a complete record upon which to decide his claim and to afford him every possible consideration. A July 2015 VA Disability Benefits Questionnaire (DBQ) confirmed a diagnosis of a left wrist sprain. The examiner offered no opinion as to the nature and etiology of the diagnosed wrist disability, or the relationship of the diagnosed condition and the physical training injury the Veteran has described. The Board finds that the evidence of record is inadequate for adjudication purposes. See Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303 (2007). Another examination is required. This matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Ask the Veteran to identify any non-VA care providers who may possess new or additional evidence pertinent to the issue on appeal. If he provides the necessary release(s), assist him in obtaining the records identified, following the procedures set forth in 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. Any new or additional (i.e., non-duplicative) evidence received should be associated with the record. If any of the records sought are not available, the record should be annotated to reflect that fact, and the Veteran and his representative should be notified. 2. Obtain copies of records pertaining to any VA treatment the Veteran has received since the time that such records were last procured, following the procedures set forth in 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. The evidence obtained, if any, should be associated with the record. 3. After the foregoing development has been completed to the extent possible, arrange to have the Veteran scheduled for a VA examination of his left wrist. The examiner should review the record. All indicated tests should be conducted and the results reported. After examining the Veteran and reviewing the record, together with the results of any testing deemed necessary, the examiner should offer an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e., whether it is 50 percent or more probable) that the Veteran has a left wrist disability that had its onset in, or is otherwise attributable to, service. In so doing, the examiner should consider and discuss the Veteran's credible report that he injured his left wrist during service while doing push-ups at very high frequency and since that time has experienced recurring flare-ups of wrist pain, particularly when engaging in physical training involving use of the wrist. A complete medical rationale for all opinions expressed must be provided. 4. After completing the above, and any other development as may be indicated by any response received as a consequence of the actions taken in the preceding paragraphs, the issues on appeal should be readjudicated based on the entirety of the evidence. If the benefit sought remains denied, the Veteran should be issued a supplemental statement of the case. An appropriate period of time should be allowed for response. DAVID A. BRENNINGMEYER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Joseph T. Leonard, 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.