Citation Nr: 22013623 Decision Date: 03/10/22 Archive Date: 03/10/22 DOCKET NO. 16-46 012A DATE: March 10, 2022 REMANDED The claim of entitlement to service connection for a left wrist disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had honorable active duty service with the United States Air Force from January 2008 to September 2012. The instant matter is on appeal from a September 2013 rating decision. In May 2019, the Veteran testified before the undersigned in a videoconference hearing. A transcript of the proceedings has been associated with the record. The Board denied entitlement to service connection for a left wrist disability in December 2020. The Veteran appealed this determination to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). Pursuant to an October 2021 Joint Motion for Remand (JMR), the Court vacated the prior denial due to reliance on a prior inadequate VA examination. The issue has returned to the Board. 1. The claim of entitlement to service connection for a left wrist disability is remanded. Remand is necessary in order to obtain a new VA examination to correct the deficiencies noted in the October 2021 JMR. Initially, a new VA examination is necessary on remand. The JMR determined that the prior VA examination, on which the Board relied in its denial, failed to consider a July 2012 medical record that indicated that the Veteran was fitted for a wrist brace. Thus, a new examination and medical opinion is necessary to consider this record in the subsequent etiological opinion. The JMR also noted that private records may be outstanding. On remand, the Veteran should be afforded an opportunity to provide these private treatment records. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Contact the Veteran and the representative of record in order to identify any outstanding non-VA treatment records regarding the issues on appeal. If non-VA providers are identified, obtain releases for those records. Make all reasonable attempts to obtain the non-VA treatment records and associate them with the claims file. If such records cannot be obtained, inform the Veteran and the representative of record, and afford an opportunity to provide these outstanding records. 2. Obtain any relevant, outstanding VA treatment records that are not already associated with the claims file. If no records are available, the claims folder must indicate this fact and the Veteran should be notified in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(e). All attempts to contact the Veteran should be documented in the record. 3. Once the aforementioned evidentiary development is complete, schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to assess the nature and etiology of his left wrist disability. The examiner must review the entire claims file, including a copy of this remand. The examiner must consider the Veteran's lay reports of observable symptomatology and specifically address a treatment record from July 2012 reflecting fitting for a wrist brace. After a thorough review of the record is complete, the examiner must respond to the following: (a.) List any and all diagnoses of the left wrist. (b.) For each identified diagnosis, opine as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran's identified left wrist diagnosis had its onset during active duty service, is related to an incident of service, or began within one year after discharge from active service. (c.) Please specifically address the Veteran's lay statements pertaining to his left wrist, and medical treatment records for the left wrist, to specifically include the July 2012 fitting for a wrist brace. The examination report should specifically state that a review of the record was conducted. The examiner should provide a complete rationale for all opinions provided. If an opinion cannot be provided without to resorting to mere speculation, the examiner should identify all medical and lay evidence considered in this conclusion, fully explain why this is the case and identify what additional evidence (if any) would allow for a more definitive opinion. 4. Following completion of the foregoing, the AOJ should review the record and readjudicate the claim on appeal. If it remains denied, the AOJ should issue an appropriate supplemental SOC, afford the Veteran and the representative of record an opportunity to respond, and return the case to the Board. B. MULLINS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board H. Fisher, 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.