Citation Nr: 22051141 Decision Date: 09/08/22 Archive Date: 09/08/22 DOCKET NO. 18-16 414 DATE: September 8, 2022 REMANDED Service connection for a right shoulder condition is remanded. Service connection for a right knee condition is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from February 1968 to January 1970. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2017 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ). 1. Service connection for a right shoulder condition is remanded. The Veteran has not been afforded a VA examination for his right shoulder condition. VA treatment records contain notations of right shoulder osteoarthritis, and there are competent and credible statements from the Veteran and a buddy statement indicating an in-service injury or event along with continuous symptoms since service, that is, indicia of a nexus. Accordingly, a remand is required to obtain a VA examination and medical opinion. See McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79, 83 (2006) (VA must provide a medical examination when there is insufficient medical evidence to decide the claim but there is evidence of a current disability, an in-service injury, and an "indication" of a potential causal link (nexus) to service). 2. Service connection for a right knee condition is remanded. The Board finds the May 2017 VA examination and medical opinion are inadequate because, as the Veteran's power of attorney correctly points out, the examiner applied a higher evidentiary standard in rendering the opinion and the examiner failed to consider the Veteran statements and other evidence of record. See Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295, 304 (2008) (holding that most of the probative value of an opinion comes from its rationale or underlying reasoning). Accordingly, a remand is required in order to obtain a new VA medical opinion. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. The AOJ should arrange for a VA examination of the Veteran (to exclude the May 2017 examiner) to determine the nature and likely cause of his right shoulder and right knee disabilities. The examiner should review the claim file (including this remand) and note such review was conducted. Based on review of the record and examination of the Veteran, the examiner should provide an opinion with detailed rationale that responds to the following: (a.) Please identify, by diagnosis, all right knee and right shoulder disabilities present during the appeal period. (b.) For each right knee disability diagnosed, is it at least as likely as not (likelihood is at least approximately balanced or nearly equal, if not higher) that such disability was either incurred in or otherwise related to the Veteran's military service? Please explain why. (c.) For each right shoulder disability diagnosed, is it at least as likely as not (likelihood is at least approximately balanced or nearly equal, if not higher) that such disability was either incurred in or otherwise related to the Veteran's military service? Please explain why. The examiner is reminded that the Veteran is competent to provide information about observable symptoms and events. The examiner should assume, for the purposes of the opinions, that the Veteran's reports are both accurate and credible. The examiner MUST address the Veteran's statements. The examiner is also reminded that, by law, service connection for chronic conditions may be established by a showing of continuous symptoms since service and the lack of treatment or diagnosis during or after service is but ONE factor in the analysis. A detailed explanation (rationale) is required for all opinions provided. (By law, the Board is not permitted to rely on any conclusion that is not supported by a thorough explanation. Providing an opinion or conclusion without a thorough explanation will delay processing of the claim and may also result in a clarification being requested.) Robert Elliott II Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Williams, 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.