Citation Nr: 21061530 Decision Date: 10/04/21 Archive Date: 10/04/21 DOCKET NO. 17-29 282 DATE: October 4, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a low back disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from June 1982 to May 1986. He also served in the Army National Guard from November 1986 to November 1987. This claim previously was before this Board in March 2019 and remanded back to the local Regional Office (RO) (Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ)) for further development and consideration including to obtain all outstanding records relevant to this claim and then for a VA examination and medical nexus opinion identifying all current low back disabilities and indicating whether any is related or attributable to the Veteran's military service. To this end, a medical opinion was provided in November 2020, but it does not comply with the Board's remand directives, so another remand is required. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). It is incumbent on the Board to ensure the adequacy of the opinion. See Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 312 (2007). The Veteran contends that his claim of back injury in service is supported by changes in his height and, more specifically, by an alleged loss of height. His service treatment records (STRs) show a height of 6712 inches when he entered service in June 1982. In comparison, his height was recorded as 69 inches in April 1986, the month prior to concluding his active-duty service in May 1986, so a difference of 112 inches. But that shows an increase in height during that service rather than a decrease. When he subsequently enlisted in the National Guard in November 1986, just a few months later, his height again was recorded as 69 inches (November 5, 1986) and as 6814 inches (November 6, 1986) the latter correlating to a decrease of 34 of an inch from April 1986 but still an increase (rather than decrease) in comparison to when initially measured for his enlistment into service in June 1982. The Veteran contends that he had a loss of 112 inches in height during his service, but those measurements in service as documented in his STRs, conversely show an increase in his height. That notwithstanding, despite that height change in service and the Board's specific instruction for the examiner to discuss on remand whether it has any significance, the November 2020 examiner did not. The Veteran's November 1986 Report of Medical History in anticipation of him beginning his National Guard service indicates that he denied recurrent back pain. Moreover, post-service clinical records are unremarkable for back complaints for the next three decades. The earliest clinical evidence of a complaint referable to his back is not until 2016. The Board recognizes that clinical records since he filed his claim conversely note that the etiology of his back disability has been reported as owing to a lifting accident in service, in 1983; however, these reports were all made decades after his service and are based on his unsubstantiated history. Post-service, the Veteran was employed in law enforcement and has been noted to have worn 19 pounds of police equipment (see 2001 private record) and has been noted to play racquetball (see 1997 record) and wrestle (see 2004 record). Police records may be useful in adjudicating his claim as they may contain physical examination reports that may be helpful to the VA compensation examiner. Accordingly, this claim is again REMANDED for the following still additional development and consideration: 1. If possible, obtain the Veteran's police officer employment physical evaluation reports, if any. 2. Then obtain an addendum opinion to the November 2020 Disability Benefits Questionnaire (DBQ). The examiner is asked to supplement the November 2020 opinion by additionally discussing whether the Veteran's recorded height changes in service and shortly thereafter support finding that it is as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that his current low back disability is related or attributable to his active service military service. To reiterate, he had the following heights on the dates indicated: 6712 inches (June 1982 entrance), 69 inches (April 1986 separation), 69 inches (November 5, 1986 prescreening for National Guard), and 6814 inches (November 6, 1986 National Guard entrance). Also, if pertinent in making this determination, the examiner should additionally consider: a) the Veteran's November 1986 Report of Medical History denying recurrent back pain; b) his post-service employment as a police officer, meaning the duties and activities intrinsic to that job - including wearing 19 pounds of equipment; c) any other post-service physical activity of significance (e.g., playing racquetball and wrestling); and d) his age at the time of initial diagnosis of a low back disability and any other factor bearing on the development of this disability. When responding, regardless of whether favorably or instead unfavorably, it is essential the examiner provide rationale preferably citing to evidence in the file supporting conclusions and/or accepted medical authority. If a response cannot be provided without actual examination of the Veteran, schedule him for an examination, but this is left to the reviewing clinician's discretion. KEITH W. ALLEN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board T. Wishard 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.