Citation Nr: 18151342 Decision Date: 11/16/18 Archive Date: 11/16/18 DOCKET NO. 18-05 383 DATE: November 16, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for disability of the cervical spine is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Army from July 2000 to November 2000 and from October 2003 to February 2005, to include service in the Southwest Asia theater of operations during the Persian Gulf War. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.2(i), 3.317(e). He also had service in the Army National Guard. His decorations include the Combat Infantryman Badge. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2017 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. The RO, in pertinent part, denied service connection for disability of the cervical spine. Entitlement to service connection for disability of the cervical spine is remanded. The Veteran asserts that he has disability of the cervical spine that was caused by a track hatch falling on his right shoulder during service. There is evidence of this incident in his service treatment records. In June 2017, a VA examiner provided an unfavorable nexus opinion with respect to the Veteran’s cervical spine. It appears, however, that the VA examiner was focused primarily on offering an opinion as to whether the Veteran’s disability could be attributed to exposures in Southwest Asia; no clear opinion was rendered as to whether it could be attributed to the hatch incident documented in service. The Veteran contends that a prison doctor told him he would need surgery on his neck. This suggests that there are relevant medical records from a correctional facility that are not in the Veteran’s file. Additional development is required. This matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Ask the Veteran to provide a release for records of treatment from the correctional facility where he was incarcerated, and to identify, and provide appropriate releases for, any other care providers who may possess new or additional evidence pertinent to the issue on appeal. If he provides the necessary release(s), assist him in obtaining the records identified, following the procedures set forth in 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. Any new or additional (i.e., non-duplicative) evidence received should be associated with the record. If any of the records sought are not available, the record should be annotated to reflect that fact, and the Veteran and his representative should be notified. 2. Obtain copies of records pertaining to any relevant VA treatment the Veteran has received since the time that such records were last procured, following the procedures set forth in 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. The evidence obtained should be associated with the record. 3. After the foregoing development has been completed to the extent possible, arrange to have the Veteran scheduled for a VA examination of his cervical spine. The examiner should review the record. All indicated tests should be conducted and the results reported. After examining the Veteran and reviewing the record, together with the results of any testing deemed necessary, the examiner should offer an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e., whether it is 50 percent or more probable) that the Veteran has a disability of his cervical spine that had its onset in, or is otherwise attributable to, service. In so doing, the examiner should discuss the medical significance, if any, of the fact that the Veteran was hit on the posterior right shoulder by the hatch of a Bradley vehicle in July 2002, during a period of active duty for training, and that possible muscle strain/contusion of the right shoulder was noted at that time. A complete medical rationale for all opinions expressed must be provided. 4. After completing the above, and any other development as may be indicated by any response received as a consequence of the actions taken in the preceding paragraphs, the Veteran’s claim should be readjudicated based on the entirety of the evidence. If the benefit sought remains denied, the Veteran and his representative should be issued a supplemental statement of the case. An appropriate period of time should be allowed for response. DAVID A. BRENNINGMEYER Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD K. Boyea, Law Clerk