Citation Nr: 18143505 Decision Date: 10/19/18 Archive Date: 10/19/18 DOCKET NO. 16-14 607 DATE: October 19, 2018 REMANDED Service connection for cervical spine disability is remanded. Service connection for right arm radiculopathy is remanded.   REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from June 1970 to June 1990. 1. Service connection for cervical spine disability is remanded. This issue is remanded for a new VA examination. The Veteran contends that his cervical spine disability began in service or was caused by his service-connected thoracolumbar spine disability. The Veteran previously underwent a VA examination in February 2016. The VA examiner concluded that the Veteran’s cervical spine diagnosis was less likely than not that the Veteran’s cervical spine DDD is proximately due to or the result of his thoracolumbar spine DJD. The examiner reasoned that the cervical spine disorder was likely caused by post-service events, including heavy manual labor, other activities, injuries, and the aging process. The examiner also opined that it is less likely than not that the Veteran’s cervical spine disorders are related to the right shoulder and scapula pain treated in service in 1987. He concluded that the issues treated in 1987 resolved with no residuals, and that the shoulder issue in service and the current cervical spine issues are separate and unrelated. He opined that injuries after service, years of physical work, and the passage of time likely caused the current cervical spine disorder. The Board find that this VA examiner’s opinion is not yet adequate. Regarding the opinion on direct service connection, the examiner essentially attributed the diagnosis to post-service injuries and “nearly 30 years of aging and heavy manual labor.” To this extent, the examiner’s rationale appears to attribute the Veteran’s condition to his service as 30 years prior to the VA examination would be 1986, which was during the Veteran’s service. (The VA examiner actually relied on a private neurosurgeon’s evaluation in June 2010, which would coincide with work since 1980.) However, the VA examiner elsewhere in the opinion more explicitly linked the diagnosis to the Veteran’s “heavy manual labor” after service, which involved “lift[ing] 60-70 pound spindles of paper by himself, and do[ing] maintenance and reapirs [sic].” If the VA examiner is attributing the cervical spine condition to post-service work, the VA examiner's opinion does not explain why any wear-and-tear during service did not contribute, even if only in part, to the current condition. Stated differently, it is not clear from the VA examiner's opinion why it was only the wear and tear occurring after service that resulted in the diagnosis. This is particularly unclear when considering the work done by the Veteran during his 20 years of service in what would appear to be a physically demanding specialty in aircraft maintenance and armament, especially during the early part of his career. Regarding the examiner’s opinion on the secondary nexus question, the examiner did not address whether a service-connected disability has aggravated the cervical spine diagnosis. Thus, the opinion is incomplete to this extent. Accordingly, remand for a new opinion is needed. 2. Service connection for right arm radiculopathy is remanded. The Veteran maintains that he has right arm radiculopathy secondary to a cervical spine diagnosis. Therefore, the radiculopathy claim is intertwined with the cervical spine claim, and they must be remanded concurrently. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. After undertaking any preliminary development needed, arrange for the relevant information in the Veteran’s claims folder to be returned to the examiner who conducted the February 2016 VA examination (or a suitable substitute if such examiner is unavailable), to prepare an addendum opinion regarding the claimed cervical spine condition. (The need for an additional in-person examination should be determined by the examiner.) The examiner must address each of the following: (a.) Whether a current cervical spine diagnosis is at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. As the examiner previously attributed the condition, in part, to the Veteran’s post service “heavy manual labor,” the examiner should explain why the Veteran’s work during service, which would be of a similar type and intensity, did not contribute to the onset of the condition. (b.) Whether a current cervical spine diagnosis was, at any point, at least as likely as not aggravated beyond its natural progression by a different disability. C. BOSELY Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD K. J. Kunz, Counsel