Citation Nr: 20003380 Decision Date: 01/14/20 Archive Date: 01/14/20 DOCKET NO. 18-44 601 DATE: January 14, 2020 ORDER New and material evidence having been received, the claim for service connection for degenerative disc disease (DDD) of the lumbar spine to include as secondary to service-connected rheumatoid arthritis is reopened. New and material disc evidence having been received, the claim for service connection for DDD of the cervical spine is reopened. New and material evidence having been received, the claim for service connection for left hand degenerative joint disease (DJD) is reopened. New and material evidence having been received, the claim for service connection for right hand DJD is reopened. New and material evidence having been received, the claim for service connection for left hip DJD is reopened. New and material evidence having been received, the claim for service connection for right hip DJD is reopened. New and material evidence having been received, the claim for service connection for left ankle DJD is reopened. New and material evidence having been received, the claim for service connection for right ankle DJD is reopened. REMANDED Service connection for DDD of the lumbar spine, to include as secondary to service-connected rheumatoid arthritis is remanded. Service connection for DDD of the cervical spine is remanded. Service connection for left hand DJD is remanded. Service connection for right hand DJD is remanded. Service connection for left hip DJD is remanded. Service connection for right hip DJD is remanded. Service connection for left ankle DJD is remanded. Service connection for right ankle DJD is remanded. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. By a final May 2012 rating decision, the Veteran’s claims for service connection for DDD of the lumbar spine, DDD of the cervical spine, left hand DJD, right hand DJD, left hip DJD, right hip DJD, left ankle DJD, and right hip DJD were denied. 2. Evidence received since the May 2012 rating decision raises a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claims. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The unappealed May 2012 rating decision denying service connection for DDD of the lumbar spine, DDD of the cervical spine, left hand DJD, right hand DJD, left hip DJD, right hip DJD, left ankle DJD, and right ankle DJD is final. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.156(b), 19.52(a). 2. The criteria for reopening a previously denied claims for service connection have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 5108; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(a). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served honorably on active duty in the United States Navy from March 1979 to July 1994. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2017 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Louisville, Kentucky. New and Material to Reopen Service connection for DDD of the lumber spine, DDD of the cervical spine, left hand DJD, right hand DJD, left hip DJD, right hip DJD, left ankle DJD, and right ankle DJD was denied in a May 2012 rating decision. The Veteran did not appeal the denial, and new and material evidence was not submitted within the appeal period. Accordingly, the May 2012 rating decision is final. See 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.156(b), 19.52. To reopen a previously and finally disallowed claim, new and material evidence must be submitted by the claimant or secured by the VA with respect to that claim since the last final denial, regardless of the basis for that denial. VA defines “new and material evidence” as follows. “New evidence” means evidence not previously submitted to agency decision makers, and “material evidence” means existing evidence that, by itself or when considered with previous evidence of record, relates to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(a). To warrant reopening, the new evidence must neither be cumulative nor redundant of the evidence of record at the time of the last prior final denial of the claim sought to be reopened and must raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim. Id.; see Shade v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 110, 117 (2010) (holding that there is a “low threshold” for reopening). The credibility of the evidence is presumed. Justus v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 510, 513 (1992). The RO previously denied the Veteran’s claims for service-connection on the basis that there was no evidence indicating a medical nexus between the current disabilities and his military service. The Veteran’s claims file now includes a September 2016 message from his physician noting that deep sea diving can cause many musculoskeletal conditions. The Veteran’s DD 214 indicates that his military occupation specialty (MOS) was diver second class. The Board finds that this new evidence is not cumulative or redundant of the evidence previously of records, relates to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate service connection, and raises a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(a). This evidence satisfies the low threshold requirement for new and material evidence, and the claim is reopened. See Shade v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 110 (2010). REASONS FOR REMAND Now that the claims are reopened, the Board finds that additional development is required before it can make a determination as to whether service connection is warranted. The Board notes that no VA examiner has opined whether the Veteran’s disabilities are related to service. As such, a remand is necessary to obtain a VA examination. In addition, a June 2018 primary care note indicates that the Veteran was filing paperwork for Social Security Disability Insurance. These records should be obtained. The matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Obtain the Veteran’s federal records from the Social Security Administration. Document all requests for information as well as all responses in the claims file. 2. Thereafter, schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the nature and etiology of his lumbar spine, cervical spine, bilateral hand, bilateral hip, and bilateral ankle disabilities. All indicated tests and studies should be performed. Following review of the claims file, the examiner must opine whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater) that the Veteran’s disabilities are related to his military service, including his in-service duties as a deep-sea diver. The examiner should take note of the Veteran’s physician’s September 2016 note maintaining that deep-sea diving can cause many musculoskeletal conditions. If the answer is no, the examiner must than opine as to whether it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran’s disabilities were caused or aggravated by his service-connected rheumatoid arthritis. The rationale for all opinions must be provided. JOHN Z. JONES Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Michael Chandeck, Associate Counsel The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.