Citation Nr: 20056772 Decision Date: 08/27/20 Archive Date: 08/27/20 DOCKET NO. 16-55 999 DATE: August 27, 2020 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for a back disability is granted. FINDING OF FACT Lumbar spine degenerative disc disease (DDD) that has been attributed to both the Veteran’s active service and his service-connected left knee disability. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for a back disability have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107 (2018); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309, 3.310 (2019). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active military service in the from April 1993 to September 2000. The case comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a September 2013 rating decision of the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). This case was previously before the Board in December 2019, at which time the issue currently on appeal was remanded for additional development. The case has now been returned to the Board for further appellate action. Service Connection – Back Disability The Veteran contends that his back disability is due to his active service, or in the alternative, was caused or worsened by his service-connected left knee disability. A review of the record shows that the Veteran has a long history of back complaints. He has reported back pain since service, and has had documented treatment for complaints of back pain since at least 2003. Further, the Veteran has a current diagnosis of DDD of the lumbar spine. Of record is a June 2020 private medical opinion from Dr. S.B. In that opinion, Dr. S.B. opined that the Veteran’s back disability was more likely than not related to service, and/or aggravated by his service-connected left knee disability. In so finding, Dr. S.B. noted that medical research clearly showed that soldiers are especially susceptible to arthritis after discharge from service, and that arthritis may manifest itself many years after the initial injury. Dr. S.B. further noted that gait issues due to an affected limb can result in the development of arthritis in proximal joints. In support of her findings, Dr. S.B. provided a detailed discussion of relevant medical literature. The Board finds that the June 2020 private medical opinion is adequate. In this regard, the examiner thoroughly reviewed and discussed the relevant evidence, considered the contentions of the Veteran, and provided a supporting rationale for the conclusions reached. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303 (2007); Stefl v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 120 (2007); Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295 (2008). The private medical opinion is the most probative evidence of record. The Board notes that there are multiple VA medical opinions of record that are against the claim. However, the Board finds those opinions inadequate as they do not fully consider the Veteran’s reports of the onset and continuity of his symptoms. Further, the opinions of record do not adequately consider all elements of a claim for secondary service connection. As the opinions are not adequate, they are of limited probative value and will not be discussed further in this decision. Accordingly, the Board finds that the evidence for and against the claim is at least in equipoise. Therefore, the benefit of the doubt must be resolved in favor of the Veteran, and entitlement to service connection for a back disability is warranted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107 (b) (2018); Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). Kristin Haddock Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board C. Ivan Franklin 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.