Citation Nr: 21009502 Decision Date: 02/22/21 Archive Date: 02/22/21 DOCKET NO. 05-03 056 DATE: February 22, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder condition is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from June 1980 to June 1984. In November 2018, the Board remanded the issues below on appeal for further development, and the case has since been returned to the Board. The Board finds that the AOJ has not substantially complied with the remand directives. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). Entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder condition is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral CTS is remanded. The Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) remanded these matters in June 2020 to, in pertinent part, obtain addendum opinions. Specifically, when providing said opinion, the examiner was directed to consider and weigh the Veteran’s relevant lay statements of record, to include his testimony during the December 2009 Decision Review Officer hearing. While the Board notes that the Veteran was afforded an examination and accompanying opinions for both issues in March 2020, the examiner failed to address the Veteran’s lay statements when providing a rationale. Accordingly, an addendum opinion is required. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain an addendum medical opinion from an appropriate medical professional regarding the nature and etiology of the Veteran’s claimed bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. The need for another examination is left to the discretion of the medical professional offering the opinion. (a.) Opine as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) the Veteran’s claimed bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome was caused by or is otherwise related to his service, to include a fall down a 12 foot deep ditch in service in 1991 during a reconnaissance training exercise, and explain why. (b.) In doing so, the examiner should consider the July 1991Chronological Record of Medical Care (translated as March 1991Chronological Record of Medical Care) documenting the Veteran’s left elbow, thumb and wrist complaints following a 12-foot fall. (c.) In doing so, the examiner MUST address and consider and weigh the Veteran’s relevant lay statements of record, to include his testimony during the December 2009 Decision Review Officer hearing. 2. Obtain an addendum medical opinion from an appropriate medical professional regarding the nature and etiology of the Veteran’s claimed left shoulder disability. The need for another examination is left to the discretion of the medical professional offering the opinion. (a.) Opine as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) the Veteran’s claimed left shoulder disability was caused by or is otherwise related to his service, to include a fall down a 12 foot deep ditch in service in 1991 during a reconnaissance training exercise, and explain why. (b.) In doing so, the examiner should consider the July 1991 Chronological Record of Medical Care (translated as March 1991 Chronological Record of Medical Care) documenting the Veteran’s left elbow, thumb and wrist complaints following a 12-foot fall. (c.) In doing so, the examiner MUST address and consider and weigh the Veteran’s relevant lay statements of record, to include his testimony during the December 2009 Decision Review Officer hearing.   3. Readjudicate the appeal. L. M. BARNARD Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board R. A. Elliott II, 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.