Citation Nr: 18161285 Decision Date: 12/31/18 Archive Date: 12/31/18 DOCKET NO. 06-36 028 DATE: December 31, 2018 ORDER Service connection for lumbar degenerative disc disease with L5-S1 spondylolisthesis is granted. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran’s lumbar degenerative disc disease with L5-S1 spondylolisthesis is related to service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for lumbar degenerative disc disease with L5-S1 spondylolisthesis are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107 (b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Air Force from April 1971 to July 1974. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2006 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in St. Petersburg, Florida. In September 2010, the Board, in pertinent part, denied the Veteran’s application to reopen the previously denied claim of service connection for a low back disability. In April 2011, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court), pursuant to a Joint Motion for Remand (Joint Motion), vacated and remanded the Board’s September 2010 decision regarding the low back disability. In October 2011, the Board granted the Veteran’s application to reopen the claim for service connection for a low back disability and remanded the reopened claim for further development. In October 2012, the Board remanded the claim for further development. In October 2015, the Board denied service connection for a low back disability. In June 2018 the Court, pursuant to a Joint Motion, vacated and remanded the Board’s October 2015 decision denying service connection for the Veteran’s low back disability. In January 2017 and May 2017, the Board remanded the case for further development. Lumbar Degenerative Disc Disease with L5-S1 Spondylolisthesis The Veteran seeks service connection for a back disability, which he contends began in service and has been recurrent since that time. Establishing service connection generally requires medical or, in certain circumstances, lay evidence of (1) a current disability; (2) an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the present disability). See Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2009); Hickson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 247, 253 (1999); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). The Veteran has a current diagnosis of lumbar degenerative disc disease with L5-S1 spondylolisthesis and reports recurrent back problems since an in-service knee and back injury. Indeed, service treatment records show complaints of bilateral knee pain and a consistent diagnosis of and treatment for chondromalacia patella; however, such records are silent as to back problems. The Veteran explained that he did not report his back problems during service as his primary focus was the knee. Critically, an in-service injury need not be documented where, as here, the Veteran’s account of the injury is both competent and credible. Thus, the first two criteria have been met. Further, the competent, credible evidence of record shows that his current back disability began during service and has been recurrent since that time. The Veteran is competent to report the onset and continuation of his back pain since service. See Charles v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 370, 374 (2002); see also Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465 (1994); Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007). The Board notes that VA examiners have opined that the Veteran’s current back disability is not related to service, but rather a post-service back injury in January 1979. See VA medical opinions (December 2011, April 2015, January 2017). However, the Board affords minimal probative value to the VA medical opinions as they fail to adequately address evidence suggesting that the Veteran had a spondylolisthesis defect that preexisted his 1979 injury. See, e.g., Joint Motion (June 2018) (discussing private treatment record, dated January 31, 1979, which shows diagnosis of “Lumbosacral strain, pre-existing spondylolisthesis defect with no slipping”). Indeed, the fact that the Veteran’s spine was normal upon entrance into service coupled with evidence of a pre-January 1979 back disorder corroborates the Veteran’s report of back problems in and since service, which, when coupled with the evidence discussed below, support a nexus between the Veteran’s current back disorder and his in-service injury. Significantly, in a December 2018 letter, an orthopedic surgeon, who thoroughly reviewed and summarized the medical evidence of record, opined that it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran’s current lumbar degenerative disc disease with L5-S1 spondylolisthesis is related to service. The surgeon explained that the evidence shows that the Veteran injured his back in service and reinjured his back after service in 1979. Indeed, the fact that he reinjured his back after service does not diminish the fact that he initially injured his back in service. The December 2018 opinion is highly probative to the etiology of the Veteran’s back disability in light of the clinician’s extensive review of the Veteran’s medical history coupled with his subject matter expertise. In sum, as the evidence shows that the Veteran’s current lumbar degenerative disc disease with L5-S1 spondylolisthesis is related to service, service connection is warranted. TRACIE N. WESNER Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Joshua Castillo, Counsel