Citation Nr: 21004134 Decision Date: 01/26/21 Archive Date: 01/26/21 DOCKET NO. 11-25 878 DATE: January 26, 2021 ORDER Service connection for lumbar spine with degenerative disc disease (claimed as back condition) is denied. FINDING OF FACT The preponderance of the competent and probative evidence is against finding that the Veteran’s current degenerative disc disease and arthritis of the lumbar spine (claimed as back condition) began during active service, or is otherwise related to an in-service injury or disease, or arthritis manifested to a degree of 10 percent or more within 1 year from separation from service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for lumbar spine with degenerative disc disease (claimed as back condition) are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1112, 1113, 1131, 1137, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309.   REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from August 1969 to December 1971, from March 1973 to December 1974 and from July 1986 to June 1990. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2010 rating decision from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in St. Petersburg, Florida. In a June 2020 decision, the Board remanded this matter for an addendum medical opinion. The Board finds that the remand directives have been met since the September 2020 addendum opinion was provided by a different examiner, as directed, and the it was supported by an adequate rationale. Accordingly, this matter is ready for adjudication. Additionally, the Veteran’s accredited representative waived RO review of additional evidence in a January 2021 brief. Service Connection for lumbar spine with degenerative disc disease (claimed as back condition) is denied. The Veteran contends that he had in-service back pain in June 1989 and November 1989, and that his back pain has continued daily since 1989. See Form 9 received 9/19/2011 at page 2. The Veteran dates his in-service back pain to approximately 1983 and attributes it to lifting and carrying items aboard ship. See CAVC Decision received 12/15/2017 at page 4. Additionally, the Veteran states that he was diagnosed with degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine (back condition) in 1993 but his private treatment records are unavailable. See Correspondence received 12/07/2014 at page 1. Certain chronic diseases will be presumed related to service, absent an intercurrent cause, if they were shown as chronic in service; or, if they manifested to a compensable degree within a presumptive period following separation from service; or, if they were noted in service (or within an applicable presumptive period) with continuity of symptomatology since service that is attributable to the chronic disease. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1112, 1113, 1137; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331, 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2013). The Veteran has a current diagnosis of degenerative disc disease with documented arthritis of the spine. See C&P Exam received 8/01/2019 at page 2 and page 7. Arthritis is an enumerated chronic condition under 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a); Walker, 708 F.3d 1331. However, the disability was not shown as chronic in service, did not manifest to a compensable degree within a presumptive period, and was not noted in service with attributable continuity of symptomatology. As stated above, the Veteran contends that he was treated in service in June and November of 1989 for back pain and was subsequently diagnosed with degenerative arthritis of the spine in 1993. However, medical records confirming the diagnosis are unavailable. The Veteran’s private treatment records do not show a diagnosis of degenerative disease of the lumbar spine until April 2003, more than 13 years after service. See Medical Treatment Record received 9/08/2009 at page 29. Even if the Veteran reports of diagnosis of degenerative disc disease were available, the time frame still puts the onset of his degenerative disc disease at three years after service and therefore outside the presumptive period of one year following discharge. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(3). While the Veteran is competent to report having experienced symptoms of back pain “daily since 1989”, he is not competent to provide a diagnosis in this case or determine that these symptoms were manifestations of degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine since diagnostic medical testing, e.g., an x-ray, is required to diagnose arthritis and this matter involves disease processes and their effect on the body’s musculoskeletal system. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377, 1377 n.4 (Fed. Cir. 2007). As such, the Veteran’s lacks competence regarding etiology and his statements in this regard also lack weight. Additionally, the Board finds that his report of daily back pain since 1989 is in conflict with the available service treatment records, which show that the Veteran denied recurrent back pain at his retirement discharge in March 1990, and the objective findings of his retirement examination report reflecting a normal back upon clinical evaluation. See STR received 6/03/2014 at pages 112 and 114. The Board finds this competent and credible evidence tends to weigh against a finding of continuous symptomology from service. The Board gives more probative value and much more weight to competent medical evidence, which establishes that the back pain noted in service was instead attributable to his now service-connected GI condition and a kidney stone (which resolved). See C&P Exam received 9/02/2020 at pages 3-4. The September 2020 VA examiner determined that the January 1989 service treatment notation of lower back pain that radiated to his testicles followed by fever and chills was not the way arthritis nor disc disease presents clinically. Further, the September 2020 VA examiner referenced the entire medical note authored by a urologist wherein the urologist indicated that the condition was indicative of “calculus or phlebolith”. Id. at page 5. Likewise, the September 2020 VA examiner found that the November 1989 complaints of four to six weeks of back pain plus occasional bloating and discomfort in the abdomen were part and parcel with the Veteran’s service-connected GI disability. Id. It was further noted that preceding the November 1989 note, another note clarified the Veteran’s symptoms to include right abdominal/back pain all the time with gastric pain. This competent medical evidence tends to show that the 1989 back pain was related to his now service-connected GI disability and not related to the current diagnosis of arthritis of the lumbar spine. The September 2020 VA examiner opined that the Veteran’s lumbar spine with degenerative disc disease (claimed as back condition) is not at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, including the January 1989 report of lower back pain and the November 1989 complaint of back pain. The rationale in addition to the abovementioned, was based on a thorough review of the Veteran’s medical record from the 1990s to the present, which support her opinion that the incremental progression of the Veteran’s degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine was in line with the aging process. The Board finds that the September 2020 VA medical addendum is adequate, and gives it great weight since it based its findings on the relevant facts in the medical record, to include noting relevant service treatment records, diagnostic tests, and treatment records, as well as consideration of the Veteran’s lay statements.   Therefore, the Board finds that the preponderance of the evidence is against a finding that the Veteran’s lumbar spine with degenerative disc disease (claimed as back condition) was incurred during his active duty service since the manifestations were related to his GI condition and a resolved kidney stone. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. Paul Sorisio Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Dixon, 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.