Citation Nr: 18155354 Decision Date: 12/04/18 Archive Date: 12/04/18 DOCKET NO. 11-28 949 DATE: December 4, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a lumbar spine disorder is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a left hip disorder, to include as secondary to a lumbar spine disorder, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active duty service from February 1977 to December 1982. He also had subsequent service in the New Jersey Army National Guard. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2010 rating decision from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran testified at a videoconference hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in ¬¬¬February 2013. A transcript of that hearing has been associated with the claims file. The Board remanded the case for further development in September 2014 and August 2015. The case has since been returned for appellate review. The Board finds that another remand is necessary in this case in order to verify the dates that the Veteran served in the New Jersey Army National Guard and to determine whether any such service was federalized. In the August 2015 remand, the Board requested that the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) verify such service. Although personnel records were associated with the claims file, the dates of service were not verified. The AOJ also indicated in the October 2018 supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) that military personnel and treatment records were obtained from the period between 1977 and 1992, whereas the Veteran has reported serving in New Jersey Army National Guard from 1984 to 2005. As such, a remand is required to ensure compliance. As the claims are being remanded, the Board also finds that the AOJ ensure that all available service treatment records from the Veteran’s National Guard service have been associated with the claims file. While the Board notes that some service treatment records from the National Guard have been associated with the claims file, it appears that development was initially done for Army Reserve records rather than National Guard records. See the June 1991 note in response to a request from the U.S. Army Reserve Personnel Center in St. Louis, Missouri. Moreover, as noted above, there may be more recent service treatment records than have been obtained. Thus, upon remand, the AOJ should ensure that all proper steps have been taken to obtain the Veteran’s complete National Guard records for his entire period of service. Additionally, the Veteran noted ongoing private treatment for his disorders with Dr. R.L. (initials used to protect privacy) and Back Pain Care Professionals in his November 2018 signed release. As the claims are being remanded, the AOJ should request those updated records. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The AOJ should obtain and associate updated medical records from Dr. R.L. and Back Pain Care Professionals with the claims file. Any outstanding VA medical records should also be obtained and associated with the claims file. 2. The AOJ should contact the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC), the Records Management Center (RMC), the appellant’s units, and any other appropriate location, to request complete National Guard service treatment records. The Veteran has reported serving in New Jersey Army National Guard from 1984 to 2005. 3. The AOJ should request verification of the dates that the appellant served in the New Jersey Army National Guard. The AOJ should also determine whether any periods of active duty for training (ACDUTRA) or inactive duty for training (INACDUTRA) were federalized. The Veteran has reported serving in New Jersey Army National Guard from 1984 to 2005. 4. After completing these actions, the AOJ should conduct any other development as may be indicated by a response received as a consequence of the actions taken in the preceding paragraphs. Further development may include obtaining an additional medical opinion if additional records, such as service treatment records, are obtained. J.W. ZISSIMOS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD B. Rideout-Davidson, Counsel