Citation Nr: 21008522 Decision Date: 02/17/21 Archive Date: 02/17/21 DOCKET NO. 14-38 682A DATE: February 17, 2021 REMANDED Service connection for a right shoulder disorder is remanded. Service connection for a left shoulder disorder is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran, who is the appellant, had active duty service from June 1981 to March 1985 and from June 1987 to March 1993. He also had National Guard service with periods of active duty for training (ACDUTRA) and inactive duty for training (INACDUTRA), which included a period of ACDUTRA from June 18, 2010 to July 2, 2010. The instant case is on appeal from a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) rating decision that, in pertinent part, denied service connection for right and left shoulder disorders. The case has been before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) previously. In November 2018, the Board remanded the case to procure an opinion as to the nature and etiology of any shoulder disorder. The Remand asked the examiner to opine whether it is as likely as not that a current shoulder disorder was related to an in-service injury, disease, or event including falls during service. As described further below, this remand was not substantially complied with, as the nexus opinion does not address the question of relationship to an in-service fall and left shoulder injury in 1984. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). Accordingly, the Board is remanding for further development. 1. Service Connection for a Right Shoulder Disorder 2. Service Connection for a Left Shoulder Disorder A September 2019 VA examination resulted in current diagnoses of bilateral shoulder strain, bilateral glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis, and bilateral acromioclavicular joint osteoarthritis. As noted above, the Veteran has periods of active duty service and periods of ACDUTRA and INACDUTRA. Active military, naval, or air service includes any period of ACDUTRA during which the individual concerned was disabled or died from a disease or injury incurred in or aggravated in the line of duty, or any period of INACDUTRA during which the individual concerned was disabled or died from injury incurred in or aggravated in the line of duty. 38 U.S.C. § 101(21), (24); 38 C.F.R. § 3.6(a), (d); Biggins v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 474, 477-78 (1991). ACDUTRA is, generally, full-time duty in the Armed Forces performed by reserves for training purposes. 38 C.F.R. § 3.6(c)(1). Accordingly, service connection may be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in, or aggravated, while performing ACDUTRA, or from injury incurred or aggravated while performing INACDUTRA. Presumptive periods do not apply to ACDUTRA or INACDUTRA. See Biggins, 1 Vet. App. at 477 78. Therefore, consideration of 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307 and 3.309 (presumption of service incurrence for certain diseases) for any periods of ACDUTRA and/or INACDUTRA is not appropriate. The service treatment records reflect a 1984 fall during active service where the Veteran hurt his back and left shoulder. The records reflect an injury to the right shoulder while playing softball on June 20, 2010, which led to treatment on June 21, 2010. The right shoulder injury is during a period of ACDUTRA. The September 2019 VA examination provided an opinion as to whether there was a link between the softball-related right shoulder injury in June 2010. The September 2019 VA examination did not address the 1984 fall with left shoulder injury during active service, as requested by the November 2018 Board remand. Because there is no opinion as to whether the 1984 fall is etiologically related to the current shoulder injury, a remand for an addendum opinion is necessary. Additionally, the Veteran has supplied a medical article related to the relationship between military servicemembers and arthritis that states that there is a significantly higher incidence of osteoarthritis among military servicemembers when compared with nonexposed controls. The examiner should review the previously provided September 2019 VA opinion and comment on whether the medical article changes the opinion. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Make available the relevant evidence in the claims file to an examiner who is able to address the questions: Left shoulder: Is there is an etiological relationship between the September 1984 in-service fall and shoulder impact and symptoms and the current left shoulder disorders. (Continued on the next page)   1. Right shoulder: The examiner should address whether the article supplied by the Veteran, Cameron KL, Driban JB, Svoboda SJ, Osteoarthritis and the Tactical Athlete: A Systematic Review. J. Athl. Train. (2016), changes the September 2019 opinion with respect to the 2010 softball injury of the right shoulder. J. PARKER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Smith, 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.