Citation Nr: A21020138 Decision Date: 12/16/21 Archive Date: 12/16/21 DOCKET NO. 210818-178880 DATE: December 16, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for left shoulder disability is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran's left shoulder disability did not have its onset during active service, arthritis did not manifest within one year of discharge from active service, and there is no indication that his current left shoulder disability is otherwise related to his active service. 2. The Veteran's left shoulder disability is not caused or aggravated by his service-connected left elbow disability. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for a left shoulder disability have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1112, 1131, 1137, 5107 (2018); 38 C.F.R. § § 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309, 3.310 (2020). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active naval service from November 1955 to October 1957. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2021 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In the August 2021 VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal, the Veteran elected the Evidence Submission docket. Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) decision on appeal, as well as any evidence submitted by the Veteran with, or within 90 days from receipt of, the VA Form 10182. 38 C.F.R. § 20.303. In the May 2021 decision, the AOJ determined that the Veteran had been diagnosed with left shoulder impingement syndrome and the claimed primary disability left elbow with impairment of supination and pronation) is service connected. The Board is bound by those favorable findings. 38 U.S.C. § 5104A (2018); 38 C.F.R. § 3.104 (2020). Service Connection Left Shoulder Disability The Veteran asserts that he has left shoulder disability that was caused by his active service or is secondary to his service-connected left elbow disability. Specifically, he maintains that he sustained an injury to his left arm and shoulder when he fell during service and that there was more damage to the elbow at the time. The Veteran's service treatment records do not show any complaints, treatment, or diagnoses related to left shoulder during active service. In February 1956, he complained of pain associated with a fracture of the left elbow that occurred prior to service. X-rays of the left elbow showed two loose fragments on each side of the elbow joint, and it was noted that he intermittently had pain at the site of those loose fragments. There was tenderness over the site of the medial deformity of the left elbow and slight limitation of function. There was no mention of a fall or any problems associated with the left shoulder. At his October 1957 separation examination, his upper extremities were normal. At a June 1961 examination for the United States Navy Reserve, the Veteran's upper extremities were normal and he denied having or having had a painful or trick shoulder. Post service, a June 2008 VA treatment record indicated that the Veteran was seen for complaints of right shoulder pain. At that time, there was no restriction of his left shoulder and he had free range of motion in the joint. An April 2015 VA treatment record indicated that the Veteran complained of a 3-week history of left shoulder pain after lifting weights. The report of an August 2017 VA examination noted a diagnosis of left shoulder impingement syndrome and osteoarthritis. A September 2017 X-ray showed mild osteoarthritis of the shoulder. A November 2018 private treatment record noted that the Veteran reported that he fell during service and injured his left elbow. He stated that he was starting to have pain that radiated up towards his left arm and shoulder. The physician indicated that the Veteran had left shoulder rotator cuff tendinosis and that the pain in his upper arm was actually a referred pain pattern from the rotator cuff. The report of a November 2019 VA examination also noted diagnoses of left shoulder impingement syndrome and osteoarthritis. In May 2021, a VA examiner reviewed the claims file and opined that the Veteran's left shoulder disability less likely than not proximately due to or the result of his service-connected left elbow disability. As rationale, the examiner noted that there is no clear evidence from review of orthopedic literature to suggest that an injury to one joint would have any significant impact on another or opposite uninjured joint or limb, unless the injury resulted in a major muscle or nerve damage causing partial or complete paralysis. The examiner explained that it is not unusual for two joints to share properties in the same person, but one joint's disease does not spread to another joint or cause damage to another joint. He concluded that the condition of the left shoulder is due to something intrinsic to the left shoulder and not the left elbow. The examiner also opined that there was no evidence of aggravation of the left shoulder disability by the left elbow disability, noting that the August 2017 VA examination showed only slightly reduced strength in the left shoulder, which was within the projected natural history of the condition and did not represent aggravation. In this case, the Board finds the most probative evidence weighs against the claim. The Board notes that the Veteran was not provided with a VA medical opinion addressing whether his left shoulder was directly incurred in or related to active service. However, the evidence does not indicate that his left shoulder disability may be associated with service. There were no complaints of any left shoulder problems during active service. At his 1957 separation examination, his upper extremities were normal and during a 1961 examination for the Navy Reserve, he denied having a painful or trick shoulder. Furthermore, the first documentation of any left shoulder problems occurred in April 2015, over 57 years after discharge. The passage of time between discharge from active service and the medical documentation of a claimed disability is a factor that tends to weigh against a claim for service connection. Maxson v. Gober, 230 F.3d 1330, 1333 (Fed. Cir. 2000). There is also no medical evidence otherwise linking his current left shoulder disability directly to service. Accordingly, the Board finds that a VA medical opinion addressing whether the Veteran's left shoulder disability is directly related to service is not warranted. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(4); see also McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). Regarding secondary service connection, the Board finds that the May 2021 VA medical opinion is adequate because the examiner thoroughly reviewed the claims file and discussed the relevant evidence, considered the contentions of the Veteran, and provided a thorough supporting rationale for the conclusions reached. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303 (2007); Stefl v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 120 (2007); Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295 (2008). Further, there is no medical opinion of record to the contrary. The Veteran is competent to describe what he has personally observed or experienced; however, to the extent his statements contradict the contemporaneous medical evidence, the Board does not find them credible. Furthermore, he is not competent to provide an opinion linking a disability to active service, as that requires medical expertise and is outside the realm of common knowledge of a layperson. Kahana v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 428 (2011); Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Therefore, the Veteran is not competent to provide an etiology opinion in this case. Further, there is no indication from the record left shoulder arthritis was manifest to a compensable degree within a year of the Veteran's separation from active service. As such, presumptive service connection for a chronic disability is not warranted in this case. 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a) (2020). Accordingly, the Board finds that the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim and entitlement to service connection for left shoulder disability is not warranted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b) (2018); Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). Sonja A. Mishalanie Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board I. Umez-Eronini, 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.