Citation Nr: 21074991 Decision Date: 12/16/21 Archive Date: 12/16/21 DOCKET NO. 17-38 032 DATE: December 16, 2021 REMANDED Service connection for back disability is remanded. Service connection for eye disability is remanded. Service connection for general arthralgia is remanded. Service connection for right ankle disability is remanded. Service connection for right knee disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Marine Corps from September 1962 to June 1983. This appeal arises from a May 2015 rating decision, denying service connection for a back disability, eye disability, general arthralgia, right ankle disability, and right knee disability. In November 2018 and October 2020, the Board remanded the case to the AOJ for additional development and consideration. The file is again before the Board for further appellate review. 1. Service connection for back disability is remanded. 2. Service connection for eye disability is remanded. 3. Service connection for general arthralgia is remanded. 4. Service connection for right ankle disability is remanded. 5. Service connection for right knee disability is remanded. The Board's prior remands directed the AOJ to contact the Puerto Rico Army National Guard, both at the command center and the individual unit office, to obtain his outstanding National Guard service treatment records and service personnel records. The Board's October 2020 remand also directed the AOJ to obtain Social Security Administration (SSA) disability records. On remand, the AOJ obtained his SSA records, so this remand directive was met. On remand, the AOJ attempted to contact the Puerto Rico Army National Guard unit repository at Cayey Armory, Puerto Rico, but the mail was returned as undeliverable. The AOJ also attempted to contact the Puerto Rico Army National Guard command. Notably, the Veteran's representative's November 2021 informal hearing presentation indicates the AOJ should have contacted the Joint Forces Headquarters for the Puerto Rico National Guard, at Fort Buchanan, Puerto Rico, but it appears the AOJ sent correspondence to the command center at this same address. On September 13, 2021, the AOJ sent the Veteran a Final Attempt Letter that stated prior correspondence to the command center elicited a response stating, "no response received." However, the Board does not find documentation of such non-response in the file, so that the AOJ should again contact the Puerto Rico Army National Guard command and/or Joint Forces Headquarters for the Puerto Rico National Guard, at Fort Buchanan, Puerto Rico to attempt to obtain the Veteran's service treatment and personnel records. Moreover, the Board's October 2020 remand had specifically directed the AOJ to contact the National Guard bureau, in the alternative. There is no indication that the AOJ attempted to take this last step to ensure that any outstanding Army National Guard records were obtained. A remand by the Board confers on a Veteran the right to substantial compliance with the remand orders. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998); D'Aries v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 97 (2008). The Veteran's representative's November 2021 informal hearing presentation also asserts the AOJ should have contacted health support services, non-commissioned officer in charge (NCOIC) for his service treatment records, as they are the top enlisted medic for Puerto Rico. So, on remand, the AOJ should also contact this office. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Make efforts to obtain the Veteran's service treatment records and personnel records by contacting (1) the Puerto Rico Army National Guard command and/or Joint Forces Headquarters for the Puerto Rico National Guard, at Fort Buchanan, Puerto Rico; (2) non-commissioned officer in charge (NCOIC) for health support services, at Fort Buchanan, Puerto Rico; and (3) the National Guard Bureau. All efforts to obtain the records must be documented. If records are not located, a formal finding of unavailability must be associated with the claims file and the Veteran notified. C. CRAWFORD Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Chatterjee, B. 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.