Citation Nr: 18141614 Decision Date: 10/11/18 Archive Date: 10/11/18 DOCKET NO. 16-32 449 DATE: October 11, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for fibromyalgia is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for degenerative disc disease (claimed as low back condition) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from July 1974 to August 1976 and from July 1995 to June 1996, with additional periods of National Guard service. This matter came before the Board of Veterans Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2015 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Board notes that the Veteran’s November 2015 Notice of Disagreement included the issues of an increased rating for his hand and forearm scars. However, when the Veteran filed his May 2016 Formal Appeal, he limited his appeal to the issues of service connection for degenerative disc disease and fibromyalgia. The issue of an increased rating for his hand and forearm scars is therefore not before the Board. Entitlement to service connection for fibromyalgia degenerative disc disease (claimed as low back condition) are remanded. The Veteran has current diagnosis of fibromyalgia and degenerative disc disease (DDD) of the spine, which he contends began in service. In a March 2015 statement, the Veteran reported that his pain began during his Marine Corps service and that it was caused from carrying heavy loads and sleeping on the ground. The Veteran stated that he was given pills but never saw a doctor and was told to “tough it out.” In an October 2015 statement, the Veteran further reported that his back was first injured while in Puerto Rico and that he was pulled from the field for 10 days but never saw a doctor. He also stated that he hurt himself marching with heavy gear. The Veteran has not yet been afforded a VA examination regarding either issue on appeal. The Board notes that the Veteran’s personnel records indicate that he served in the infantry, which is consistent with his lay statements of marching with gear. The Board also notes that the Veteran is competent to report symptoms such as pain and that his competent lay statements should not be disregarded solely due to the absence of contemporaneous medical records. See Buchanan v. Nicholson, 451 F.3d 1331, 1336-37 (Fed. Cir. 2006). As the Veteran has current diagnosis of both fibromyalgia and DDD and has submitted competent lay statements regarding injuries and symptoms in service, remand for VA examinations regarding the issues on appeal is required. 38 U.S.C. § 5103A(d) (West 2014); McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79, 81 (2006). As the appeal is being remanded, any outstanding VA treatment records should also be obtained. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain the Veteran’s VA treatment records for the period from January 2018 to the Present. 2. Schedule the Veteran for an appropriate VA examination, to determine the etiology of any current spinal disability, to include degenerative disc disease. The examiner should review the file and provide a complete rationale for all opinions expressed. For any current spinal disability found to be diagnosed, the examiner should provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that any such disability is related to service. In providing the opinion, the examiner should consider and discuss any lay statements of record, to include the Veteran’s statements regarding the onset and persistence of his symptoms. 3. Schedule the Veteran for an appropriate VA examination, to determine the etiology of his fibromyalgia. The examiner should review the file and provide a complete rationale for all opinions expressed. The examiner should provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran’s fibromyalgia is related to service. In providing the opinion, the examiner should consider and discuss any lay statements of record, to include the Veteran’s statements regarding the onset and persistence of his symptoms. 4. If upon completion of the above action the appeal remains denied, the case should be returned to the Board after compliance with appellate procedures. E. I. VELEZ Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD A. Arnold, Associate Counsel