Citation Nr: 21072914 Decision Date: 12/06/21 Archive Date: 12/06/21 DOCKET NO. 17-23 617 DATE: December 6, 2021 REMANDED The claim of entitlement to service connection for a right thigh disability, claimed as a right thigh injury, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had honorable active duty service with the United States Army from May 1985 to April 1986, and additional service with the Army National Guard from March 1985 to May 1991. The instant matter is on appeal from a January 2014 rating decision. In September 2020, the Veteran testified before the undersigned in a virtual hearing. A transcript of the proceedings has been associated with the record. In February 2021, the Board remanded this issue for additional evidentiary development, specifically to conduct a more thorough search for the Veteran's service treatment records from his entire period of service. 1. The claim of entitlement to service connection for a right thigh disability, claimed as a right thigh injury, is remanded. The Board regrets the additional delay, but remand is again necessary in order to ensure compliance with previous remand instructions. In the February 2021 remand, the Board requested another search for the Veteran's complete service treatment records as periods of service, including an overseas annual training, may have been omitted from the initial search. In response, a search was conducted in the Personnel Information Exchange System (PIES) for only the Veteran's period of active duty service. The record does not reflect that a search was conducted with the Army National Guard of his state for any additional records from March 1985 to May 1991. As such, remand is again necessary in order to comply with the previous remand instructions seeking a broader search of the Veteran's complete service records. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). Furthermore, remand is also necessary in order to obtain an adequate medical opinion regarding his claimed thigh injury. Following a September 2021 VA examination, an examiner opined that the Veteran's present disability, diagnosed as tendinopathy and a right hip strain, was less likely as not related to service as service treatment records did not reflect treatment or diagnosis pertaining to the right hip during service. Despite noting the Veteran's report of an injury and treatment during service, the examiner omitted discussion of this in the report's cursory rationale. Accordingly, this opinion is inadequate, and remand is necessary to obtain a more thorough medical opinion on the issue. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Attempt to obtain, through all indicated and appropriate sources, any outstanding service treatment records, to include the Veteran's state Army National Guard from March 1985 to May 1991. 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 any relevant, outstanding VA treatment records that are not already associated with the claims file. If no records are available, the claims folder must indicate this fact and the Veteran should be notified in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(e). All attempts to contact the Veteran should be documented in the record. 3. Once the aforementioned development is complete, obtain a new medical opinion to address the etiology of his claimed right thigh disability. A new examination may be scheduled if deemed necessary by the examiner. A complete copy of the claims file must be provided to the examiner, including a copy of this remand and the hearing transcript. The examiner should consider lay reports of observable symptomatology. After a thorough review of the record, the examiner should opine as to the following: (a.) Is it at least as likely as not (i.e., a probability of 50 percent or more) that any right thigh disability had its onset during active service or within one year of separation from service, or, otherwise resulted from active military service? Please specifically discuss the Veteran's account of the injury. It is insufficient to premise the entire medical opinion on the absence of service treatment records documenting an injury. 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. 4. Following completion of the foregoing, the AOJ should review the record and readjudicate the claim on appeal. If it remains denied, the AOJ should issue an appropriate supplemental SOC, afford the Veteran and his representative an opportunity to respond, and return the case to the Board. B. MULLINS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board H. Fisher, 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.