Citation Nr: 21070930 Decision Date: 11/27/21 Archive Date: 11/27/21 DOCKET NO. 20-02 259 DATE: November 27, 2021 REMANDED Service connection for a lumbar spine disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from June 1962 to August 1963. This case is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2017 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) regional office. In August 2021, the Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge at a virtual hearing. A copy of the hearing transcript is in the claims file. Service Connection for a Lumbar Spine Disability The Veteran attributes his lumbar spine disability to an in-service injury. At hearing, he testified that he hurt his back unloading compressors, which ultimately led to a medical discharge. He also testified that he received private treatment for his back as recently as 2020. He reported that, according to his doctor, a CT scan taken at that time showed evidence of an old back injury. There are no private treatment records on file. As the Veteran's testimony indicates there are outstanding records relevant to his claim, remand to the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) is warranted. Additionally, the Board finds the December 2017 VA medical opinion inadequate to decide the claim. The 2017 examiner determined that the Veteran's spondylosis/degenerative joint disease was less likely than not incurred in or caused by service, but rather due to age and obesity. The examiner also noted, without elaborating, that he "has intermittently sought back condition care but often it's an acute exacerbation." The rationale above is conclusory, vague, and not sufficient to inform the Board of the examiner's medical judgment. Monzingo v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 97, 105 (2012). Furthermore, the examiner did not address the Veteran's lay statements about the nature of his in-service injury, or about the onset and course of his disability. Miller v. Wilkie, 32 Vet. App. 249, 25960 (2020). Remand for an addendum opinion is therefore appropriate. On remand, the examiner must clearly consider and discuss the pertinent lay evidence, including the Veteran's August 2021 testimony. The Board by this remand makes no determination, expressed or implied, concerning the credibility of any statements on file. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Ask the Veteran to complete a VA Form 21-4142 for all relevant private treatment records. Make two requests for the authorized records, unless it is clear after the first request that a second request would be futile. Associate any records received with the claims file. 2. Obtain an addendum medical opinion on the nature and etiology of the Veteran's lumbar spine disability. Schedule another in-person examination only if the examiner deems it necessary to render the opinion. After reviewing the claims file, the examiner must address the following questions: (a.) Is it at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the claimed lumbar spine disability was incurred in service or is otherwise related to service? (b.) Is it at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the claimed lumbar spine disability became manifest within one year of separation? If so, what were the manifestations? In particular, the examiner must clearly consider and discuss the Veteran's August 2021 testimony and any other pertinent lay statements about the nature of his in-service injury, and about the onset and course of his disability. 3. Review the medical opinion above to ensure substantial compliance with the Board's directives. Take any necessary corrective action. 4. Readjudicate the Veteran's claim. If it remains denied, issue a supplemental statement of the case, and allow the Veteran and his representative the opportunity to respond. Then return to the Board for further appellate review. KELLI A. KORDICH Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board D.Z. Wall, 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.