Citation Nr: 18159316 Decision Date: 12/19/18 Archive Date: 12/18/18 DOCKET NO. 16-50 690 DATE: December 19, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a neck disability, to include degenerative disc disease of the cervical spine, is remanded. Entitlement to a low back disability, to include degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served honorably in the U.S. Army from April 1982 to April 1985 and from October 1987 to June 1994. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2015 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) denying service connection for the Veteran’s low back and neck disabilities. The Veteran’s Form 9 indicates that he did not request a hearing. Entitlement to service connection for a low back disability and a neck disability. Although the Board regrets the additional delay, the Board finds that further development is required before the claim on appeal can be decided. The Veteran contends that his current low back and neck disabilities both had their onset in service after he fell from a helicopter during an air assault training exercise, causing him to hit the ground very hard, to jar his entire body and in particular his lower back, and to suffer excruciating pain for some time. In May 2015, a VA examination found the Veteran’s diagnoses of his low back and neck disabilities to be less likely than not proximately due to or the result of his military service. In so finding, the VA examiner cited to an absence of evidence in the record that either condition was caused by the Veteran’s military service, noting the gap in time between the Veteran’s separation from service in June 1994 and his treatment which first occurred more than 10 years later. The examiner also noted the Veteran’s post-military occupation as a police officer and evidence of a work-related injury in 2009. However, the May 2015 VA examiner’s opinion failed to address the Veteran’s in-service fall from a helicopter or whether that fall had any causal relationship to the Veteran’s current neck and low back disabilities. The VA examiner’s report also failed to address a 1993 notation in the Veteran’s service treatment records indicating in-service treatment for neck pain relating to weight-lifting. In light of the foregoing, the Board finds that the evidence of record is insufficient to determine the etiology of either the Veteran’s current low back or neck disabilities, and in the absence of sufficient clarification, the Board lacks the requisite medical expertise to determine their nature and etiology. See Colvin v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 171, 175 (1991). Accordingly, the Board finds that another examination is necessary to determine whether the Veteran’s low back or neck disabilities are causally related to his active military service and thus entitled to service connection on any basis. See McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79, 81 (2006). Accordingly, the matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain and associate with the claims file copies of all outstanding VA and private treatment records, since June 1994. 2. After obtaining all necessary records, forward the claims folder to a suitable expert to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran’s current low back disability. The Veteran need not be scheduled for another physical examination unless such examination is considered necessary by the examiner. The claims folder should be made available and reviewed by the examiner. All indicated studies should be performed and all findings should be reported in detail. The examiner should state whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e. 50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran’s currently diagnosed low back disability is due to or otherwise causally or etiologically related to his military service. In this regard, the examiner should note that a rationale is required for any etiological opinion. In providing this opinion, the examiner should specifically comment on the following: (i) the Veteran’s report of an in-service fall from a helicopter and state whether it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran’s low back disability is due to or otherwise causally or etiologically related to that fall; (ii) service treatment records dated November 1993 which indicate that the Veteran was treated in-service for neck pain associated with weight-lifting; and (iii) any causal relationship between the Veteran’s current low back disability and his duties in service (heavy lifting, rappelling from towers and helicopters). 3. After obtaining all necessary records, forward the claims folder to a suitable expert to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran’s current neck disability. The Veteran need not be scheduled for another physical examination unless such examination is considered necessary by the examiner. The claims folder should be made available and reviewed by the examiner. All indicated studies should be performed and all findings should be reported in detail. The examiner should state whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e. 50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran’s currently diagnosed neck disability is due to or otherwise causally or etiologically related to his military service. In this regard, the examiner should note that a rationale is required for any etiological opinion. In providing this opinion, the examiner should specifically comment on the following: (i) the Veteran’s report of an in-service fall from a helicopter and state whether it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran’s neck disability is due to or otherwise causally or etiologically related to that fall; (ii) service treatment records dated November 1993 which indicate that the Veteran was treated in-service for neck pain associated with weight-lifting; and (iii) any causal relationship between the Veteran’s current neck disability and duties in service (heavy lifting, rappelling from towers and helicopters). (Continued on the next page)   A rationale is required for any etiological opinion. H. SEESEL Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Hannah Marsdale, Associate Counsel