Citation Nr: 21075740 Decision Date: 12/21/21 Archive Date: 12/21/21 DOCKET NO. 13-26 181 DATE: December 21, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral shoulder disorder is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from September 1974 to September 1976. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a November 2010 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In February 2021, the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims vacated the Board's April 2020 decision and remanded the matter, part, because of an inadequate December 2019 VA medical opinion. Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral shoulder disorder is remanded. The Board cannot make a fully informed decision on the issue of entitlement to service connection for a bilateral shoulder disorder because no VA examiner has provided adequate consideration of the Veteran's lay statements. Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295 (2008); Dalton v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 23 (2007). As a general matter, once VA undertakes to provide an examination, it must provide an adequate one or, at a minimum, notify the claimant why one will not be provided. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 311 (2007). The Boarded notes that the Veteran has current diagnoses of shoulder disorders. Romanowsky v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 289, 293 (2013). The Board finds that the Veteran had two in-service treatments for right shoulder pain. The Veteran is competent to provide statements of symptoms that are observable to the senses. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2007); Kahana v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 428, 433-435 (2011). The December 2019 VA medical opinion listed, as one of its reasons for providing a negative causation opinion, that there was no medical care relating to shoulder complaints nor subjective complaints of shoulder pain on subsequent review of systems until 2012. However, evidence of record exists, in the form of the Veteran's lay statements in July 2018 and August 2019 VA treatment notes and the December 2019 VA examination report, that indicate complaints of pain in shoulders since service. A new VA medical opinion is warranted because the December 2019 VA medical opinion improperly relied on a finding of no treatment or chronicity since service. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: The Board makes no finding, implicit or otherwise, as to the credibility of the Veteran's assertions. Neither the Veteran's credibility nor any lack thereof should be presumed in this remand order. Obtain an addendum opinion from an appropriate clinician regarding the bilateral shoulder disorder. Schedule the Veteran for another VA examination, if needed, to answer the following questions. The examiner must review the claims file, including the Veteran's July 2018, August 2019, and December 2019 lay statements and a copy of this remand order. If a diagnosis cannot be provided but the Veteran's condition manifests in symptoms that cause functional impairment, then the examiner should consider them a "disability" for the purpose of providing the requested opinion below. The examiner is asked to provide a response to the following: Is bilateral shoulder disorder at least as likely as not related to service, including right shoulder pain? Provide a rationale to support the opinion. In providing the requested opinion, consider the Veteran's description of in-service injury and symptoms as well as post-service symptoms. Stated another way, do the Veteran's reports about symptoms align with how the currently diagnosed disability is known to develop or are the Veteran's reports generally inconsistent with medical knowledge or implausible? G. A. WASIK Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board James Hekel 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.