Citation Nr: 18152076
Decision Date: 11/20/18	Archive Date: 11/20/18

DOCKET NO. 16-39 595
DATE:	November 20, 2018
REMANDED
Entitlement to service connection for a lumbar spine disorder is remanded.
REASONS FOR REMAND
The Veteran had active service from January 1967 to December 1967.  
1. Entitlement to service connection for a lumbar spine disorder is remanded.
A claim for service connection for a lumbar spine disorder was denied in an October 1968 rating decision.  The claim was denied because the evidence did not show a current low back disorder.  The decision notes that the Veteran was treated for spondylosis during service and that the spondylosis was determined to have preexisted service and not undergone aggravation during service but also that the Veteran did not have spondylosis or any other lumbar spine disorder during the period of the claim.  The Veteran was notified of the decision and did not appeal within the appeal period or submit pertinent evidence within the appeal period.  In connection with the Veteran’s claim to reopen, evidence has been added to the record, which includes diagnoses of lumbar spine disorder, including degenerative disc disease and lumbar strain.  The Board finds that new and material evidence has been received sufficient to reopen the previously denied claim.  38 C.F.R. § 3.156(a); Shade v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 110, 117-18 (2010); Justus v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 510, 513 (1992).  
The Board finds the record would benefit if another medical opinion were obtained to determine whether a current lumbar spine disorder is related to service.  Specifically, the Board finds the record would benefit if an opinion were provided to clarify whether the Veteran currently has spondylosis.  
The matter is REMANDED for the following action:
1. Undertake appropriate development to obtain all outstanding medical records.
2. Obtain a medical opinion to determine whether a current lumbar spine disorder is related to service.  All pertinent evidence of record must be made available to and reviewed by the medical professional.  
The medical professional must clarify whether the Veteran currently has spondylosis.
If the Veteran has spondylosis, the medical professional should state whether the current spondylosis is a continuation of the in-service spondylosis, with consideration of the normal radiographic imaging in 1968.  
For any disorder other than spondylosis, the medical professional providing the opinion should state whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) that the disorder first manifest in active service or is etiologically related to service, including the reported in-service injury.  The examiner must provide a rationale for all opinions expressed, with consideration of the in-service treatment, the September 1968 VA examination record, and the private medical records which reveal treatment since 2002.  The medical professional should also consider the March 2014 private medical opinion and May 2014 VA medical opinion.    
If an examiner is unable to provide any required opinion, the examiner should explain why.  If an examiner cannot provide an opinion without resorting to mere speculation, a complete explanation as to why this is so should be provided.  If the inability to provide a more definitive opinion is the result of a need for additional information, the additional information that is needed should be identified.  
3. Thereafter, readjudicate the Veteran’s claim.  If the benefit sought on appeal remains denied, the Veteran should be provided a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC).  The SSOC must contain notice of all relevant actions taken on the claims for benefits, to include a summary of the evidence and applicable law and regulations considered pertinent to the issue currently on appeal.  An appropriate period of time should be allowed for response.  
 
T. REYNOLDS
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	N. Snyder, counsel