Citation Nr: 21032746 Decision Date: 05/27/21 Archive Date: 05/27/21 DOCKET NO. 16-52 659 DATE: May 27, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a right shoulder disorder is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral knee disorders is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from April 1954 to July 1958 and from September 1958 to June 1976. This appeal to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) is from an April 2015 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In August 2019, the Veteran testified during a video conference hearing before the undersigned; a transcript of the hearing is in the claims file. The Board remanded these matters in February 2020 and November 2020. 1. Entitlement to service connection for a right shoulder disorder is remanded. 2. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral knee disorders is remanded. These matters must be remanded again because there was not substantial compliance with the November 2020 remand. In particular, the Board raised the question of whether diagnostic imaging studies such as X-rays or MRIs for the Veteran's right shoulder and bilateral knee disorders were needed since none had been conducted previously. The examination reports for the knees and right shoulder both show that no testing was completed, but it unclear whether the testing was not necessary or whether the clinician did not schedule the testing. Furthermore, the Board emphasized that the Veteran's service treatment records were unavailable, so there were no such records to review. However, as with the July 2020 examiners, the March 2021 examiner stated he could find no records for the Veteran going to sick call during service for his knees or right shoulder. Thus, this notation suggests that the remand directives were not read and that the file was not reviewed thoroughly to realize there were no service treatment records to review. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Schedule the Veteran for VA examinations to determine whether he has right shoulder or bilateral knee disorders that are related to service. The claims file and a copy of this remand must be made available to and reviewed by the examiner. a) All pertinent findings should be noted, to include appropriate diagnostic imaging such as X-rays or MRIs for the Veteran's right shoulder and knees. If the examiner determines that imaging is not needed to diagnose the right shoulder or bilateral knee disorders, then the examiner must make a statement to that effect. b) The clinician must opine whether the Veteran's right shoulder disability is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) related to service. The clinician must consider the Veteran's contentions that the disorder is due to wear and tear during service and that his service personnel records indicate his military occupational specialty involved some physical activity. He testified that his duties were similar to that of a carpenter. The clinician is reminded that the Veteran's service treatment records are unavailable. The Board also notes that the Veteran testified that he went to sick call during service, but he could not specifically recall if he sought treatment for his right shoulder. c) The clinician must opine whether the Veteran's bilateral knee disability is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) related to service. The clinician must consider the Veteran's contentions that the disorders are due to wear and tear during service and that his service personnel records indicate his military occupational specialty involved some physical activity. He testified that his duties were similar to that of a carpenter. (Continued on the next page) The clinician is reminded that the Veteran's service treatment records are unavailable. The Board also notes that the Veteran testified he was treated for his knees during service and that he is competent to report that he had symptoms during service. d) The Veteran's reported history should be considered credible for purposes of these opinions. The clinician must explain the rationale for each opinion and address the Veteran's contention regarding the impact of wear and tear in service. S. HENEKS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Bredehorst, 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.