Citation Nr: 21025610 Decision Date: 04/28/21 Archive Date: 04/28/21 DOCKET NO. 14-42 145 DATE: April 28, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for a right shoulder disability is granted. VETERAN’S CONTENTIONS The Veteran contends that he should be service connected for his right shoulder disability because it had its clinical onset during his active service. Specifically, the Veteran reported that he injured his right shoulder while playing football. See May 2013 VA Examination. The Veteran explained that never went to sick bay for the initial right shoulder injury because he believed that too many sick bay visits would negatively affect his ability to be promoted. See December 2014 VA Form 9. Additionally, the Veteran has consistently treated his right shoulder pain with various over-the-counter medications since service. See November 2010 VA Treatment Record and May 2013 VA Examination. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran has experienced chronic right shoulder pain, currently diagnosed as related to osteoarthritis of the right shoulder, since service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for the Veteran’s right shoulder disability are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(a), 3.307. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from February 1981 to February 1981. This matter comes before the Board of Veteran’s Appeal (Board) on appeal from a June 2013 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In September 2018, the Board denied service connection for the Veteran’s bilateral shoulder disability. The Veteran appealed the Board’s decision with respect to the right shoulder disability only to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In August 2019, the Veteran and VA’s Office of General Counsel filed a Joint Motion for Remand (JMR) requesting that the Court vacate the Board’s decision and remand the case for readjudication. The Court granted the JMR and returned the case to the Board for further development and readjudication in compliance with the directives specified. Subsequently, this matter was previously remanded in January 2020 and January 2021 for additional development. The case has now returned to the Board for appellate review. Entitlement to service connection for a right shoulder disability is granted. Generally, in order to prove service connection, there must be competent, credible evidence of (1) a current disability, (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of an injury or disease, and (3) a nexus, or link, between the current disability and the in-service disease or injury. See, e.g., Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2009); Pond v. West, 12 Vet. App. 341 (1999). After reviewing the evidence of record, the Board finds that service connection for the right shoulder disability is warranted in the instant case. Turning to the evidence of record, the Board finds that the Veteran’s right shoulder disability was confirmed by two VA examiners. See VA Examinations dated May 2013 and January 2021. Next, the Board finds that the evidence of record demonstrates an in-service incurrence of his right shoulder disability. Specifically, the Veteran has repeatedly stated that he hurt his right shoulder while playing football in service and that he has continued to experience pain and functional limitations ever since. See November 2010 VA Treatment Record. The Veteran explained that he never went to sick bay for the initial right shoulder injury because he believed that too many sick bay visits would negatively affect his ability to be promoted. See December 2014 VA Form 9. Further, the Veteran’s May 1987 Reserve Service Treatment Record confirms that the Veteran had a right shoulder rotator cuff injury that was treated with Tylenol. See May 1987 Reserve Service Treatment Record. As a layperson, the Veteran is competent to report on all things which he has personal knowledge derived from his own senses, including discussing his continuous symptoms of experiencing right shoulder pain. See Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 470 (1994). The Board finds the Veteran's reports of the onset of pain in service, and continuous symptoms of right shoulder pain since his service to be credible in the instant case. Lastly, regarding a link between the Veteran's right shoulder disability and service, the Board finds that, as reported by the Veteran, his right shoulder pain began in service and has continued to the present. See November 2010 VA Treatment Record, see also, December 2014 VA Form 9. The Veteran stated that after service he has consistently treated his right shoulder pain with over-the-counter Motrin, Tylenol, BioFreeze, and Advil. See November 2010 VA Treatment and May 2013 VA Examination Report. Additionally, as stated above, the Veteran is competent to identify his continuous right shoulder pain since service. See Charles v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 370, 374 (2002); Layno, 6 Vet. App. at 465. In addition to the Veteran’s statements, there is negative opinion evidence against the claim. The Board, however, affords the VA opinions little probative weight because the examiners failed to address the Veteran’s contentions regarding continuity of right shoulder pain and the use of over-the-counter treatment for his right shoulder pain. The Board acknowledges that the May 2013 and January 2021 VA examiners opined that the Veteran’s right shoulder disability was not related to service. Specifically, the May 2013 VA examiner explained that a rotator cuff injury results in chronic pain not episodic pain, but at this examination, the Veteran described his continuous treatment of his right shoulder disability. Additionally, the January 2021 VA examiner noted that there was a lack of evidence of a chronic shoulder disability for the remainder of service and even after service. However, these examiners failed to address the Veteran’s reports of continuous pain and use of over-the-counter remedies for pain management. Moreover, the Board finds that these opinions are inadequate because they are based on inaccurate factual premises and relied on the absence of evidence in the Veteran's service medical records to provide a negative opinion. See Dalton v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 23, 39-40 (2007). Additionally, the August 2020 examiner found that the Veteran did not have a right shoulder disability because the Veteran’s range of motion testing was normal. See August 2020 VA Examination. However, this finding contradicts the May 2013 and January 2021 examiners’ findings that the Veteran did have osteoarthritis in his right shoulder based on their review of the Veteran’s x-rays. See May 2013 and January 2021 VA Examination. Further, in a September 2020 addendum opinion, the same examiner found that the Veteran’s use of the over-the-counter pain medicine was consistent with the management of right shoulder muscle strain, although the examiner still found that the Veteran did not have a right shoulder disability. Therefore, the Board finds that the September 2020 opinion is probative only regarding the Veteran’s use of over-the-counter pain medicine being consistent with a right shoulder strain. Based on the Veteran’s lay statements, the Board finds that service connection is warranted. 38 U.S.C.S. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. S.C. Krembs Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board S.Foster, 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.