Citation Nr: 21010139 Decision Date: 02/24/21 Archive Date: 02/24/21 DOCKET NO. 14-31 393 DATE: February 24, 2021 REMANDED Service connection for a left wrist disorder is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had honorable active duty service in the United States Army from December 1993 to November 1997. In April 2018 and May 2020, this case was remanded for additional development. Service connection for a left wrist disorder is remanded. A remand by the Board confers upon the claimant the right to compliance with the remand instructions and imposes upon VA a concomitant duty to ensure such compliance. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). In May 2020, the Board remanded the claim to obtain a VA medical opinion that discussed the Veteran’s lay statements of injuring his left wrist while parachuting during service. The Board noted that the prior VA examiner did not consider the Veteran’s lay statements and improperly relied on the lack of in-service treatment for a left wrist disorder despite the in-service evidence of treatment for such. A VA medical opinion was obtained in September 2020. Unfortunately, the examiner did not discuss the Veteran’s lay statements that he injured his left wrist while parachuting during service. Accordingly, an additional remand is required to obtain an adequate VA medical opinion. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 at 271. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. The Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) should undertake appropriate development to obtain any outstanding records pertinent to the Veteran’s claim. If any requested records are not available, the record should be annotated to reflect this fact and the Veteran notified in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (e). 2. Then, the AOJ should obtain a VA medical opinion (by a physician other than that the examiners who provided the December 2011, December 2018, and September 2020 medical opinions) to determine the nature and cause of the Veteran left wrist disorder. All pertinent evidence of record must be made available to and reviewed by the examiner. Following a review of the relevant records and lay statements, the examiner must provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater degree of probability) that the left wrist disorder began in or is otherwise related to the Veteran’s active duty service. In providing the opinion, the examiner MUST consider AND DISCUSS the Veteran’s lay statements regarding injuring his left wrist while parachuting during service, as well as the in-service treatment for left wrist pain. The rationale for all opinions expressed must also be provided. If the examiner is unable to provide any required opinion, she or she should explain why. If an opinion cannot be provided without resorting to mere speculation, she or she shall provide a complete explanation as to why this is so. If the inability to provide a more definitive opinion is the result of a need for additional information, examiner should identify the additional information that is needed. 3. Then, the AOJ should readjudicate the issue on appeal. If the benefit sought on appeal is not granted to the Veteran’s satisfaction, the Veteran and his representative should be furnished an appropriate supplemental statement of the case and be afforded the requisite opportunity to respond. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board for further appellate action. VICTORIA MOSHIASHWILI Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board A. McKinley, 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.