Citation Nr: 25004535 Decision Date: 04/02/25 Archive Date: 04/02/25 DOCKET NO. 20-25 219 DATE: April 2, 2025 REMANDED Service connection for a bilateral shoulder disorder is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from May 1963 to May 1965. The Veteran died in April 2015. The substitute appellant is his surviving spouse. The case is on appeal from a September 2018 rating decision. In February 2023, the appellant and her son testified at a Board hearing. Service connection for a bilateral shoulder disorder While the Board regrets the delay, a remand is needed to obtain a medical opinion as to secondary service connection which specifically addresses the Veteran's contention. In February 2024, the Board remanded the claim, in part, to obtain new medical opinions addressing secondary service connection. Those opinions were obtained in May 2024, and an addendum medical opinion was obtained in July 2024. The examiner opined that the Veteran's bilateral shoulder disorder was less likely than not caused or aggravated by his lumbar spine disability because the lumbar spine is not anatomically connected with the shoulder. Thus, even if there were significant disability with the back, additional strain on the shoulders would not be expected. To the contrary, significant back issues would tend to lessen use of the shoulders as any significant movement or weight with the shoulders would be expected to irritate the back. The July 2024 examiner further opined that, even if the Veteran's shoulders bothered him, his lumbar spine debilitation would need to be severe (ongoing visits for treatment, surgeries, significant or permanent change in posture, use of ambulatory assistive devices like a cane, walker, or wheelchair) for back pain to cause arthritis in the shoulders. Because none was present in this case, the Veteran's lumbar spine disability less likely than not caused or aggravated his shoulder disorder. As stated in the November 2024 remand, the Board finds that, this medical opinion adequately describes that there would ordinarily be no general connection between the shoulders and a lumbar spine disability. However, at the Board hearing, the appellant testified that the Veteran was more prone to falls due to his lumbar spine disability after 2010. The testimony also referenced the Veteran's hip disabilities. The testimony implied that the Veteran's shoulders were somehow affected by the falls, though the Board has not been able to find any record of a shoulder injury as a result of a fall. Rather, an April 2001 VA treatment record notes left shoulder arthritis, a January 2003 VA treatment record notes right shoulder pain for 2 months, and April 2008 and July 2008 VA treatment records note bilateral shoulder discomfort. Nonetheless, a remand is needed to address the specific contention raised at the Board hearing. Colvin v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 171 (1991); see also Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). In November 2024, the Board remanded the claim to obtain a medical opinion as to direct service connection. A medical opinion was obtained in January 2025 and an addendum medical opinion was obtained in February 2025. Those medical opinions adequately address direct service connection, and that contention need not be addressed on remand. As a final matter, in December 2024, the appellant was asked to authorize VA to obtain private treatment records from Dr. W.B. at Glen Ellyn and Wheaton Medical Clinic. No authorization was provided. Thus, the Board finds that VA has satisfied its duty to assist the appellant in obtaining these records. See Wood v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 190 (1991) (noting that VA's duty to assist is not a one-way street). The appellant is encouraged to submit these reports. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: Obtain an addendum medical opinion as to the etiology of the Veteran's bilateral shoulder condition. Specifically, the examiner should address the following: Whether it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran's bilateral shoulder condition was caused or aggravated by his service-connected disabilities, including falls as a result of his lumbar spine disability and/or bilateral hip disability in the later years of his life. A complete rationale should be provided for any opinion rendered. In so opining, the examiner should consider the Board hearing testimony that the Veteran experienced falls due to his low back and/or bilateral hip disabilities that caused or aggravated his bilateral shoulder condition. C. CRAWFORD Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board J. George 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.