Citation Nr: 21073967 Decision Date: 12/13/21 Archive Date: 12/13/21 DOCKET NO. 18-13 735 DATE: December 13, 2021 ORDER The petition to reopen the claim of service connection for a lower back disability is denied. FINDING OF FACT 1. The Veteran was denied service connection for a back disability in an August 1953 rating decision. He did not perfect an appeal during the requisite time period, and the decision became final. 2. Evidence associated with the record since the August 1953 rating decision is not related to unestablished facts nor does it raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the Veteran's claim for service connection for a back disability. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The August 1953 rating decision that determined that the Veteran's back disability is not related to service is final. 38 U.S.C. § 7105 (c); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.104, 20.302, 20.1103. 2. New and material evidence has not been received to reopen the claim of entitlement to service connection for a back disability. 38 U.S.C. §§ 5108, 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from March to July 1953. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a rating decision issued in November 2017 by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran seeks to reopen a previously-denied claim for service connection for a back disability. If a claim of entitlement to service connection has been previously denied and that decision became final, the claim can be reopened and reconsidered only if new and material evidence is presented with respect to that claim. 38 U.S.C. § 5108. New evidence means existing evidence not previously submitted to agency decision-makers. 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. New and material evidence can be neither 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. 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(a). The credibility of the evidence is presumed for purposes of reopening the claim. See Justus v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 510, 513 (1992). The threshold for reopening is low. Shade v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 110, 117 (2010). The RO denied the Veteran's claim of service connection for a back disability in August 1953, finding that the Veteran's back disability was not incurred or aggravated by his brief military service. The Veteran was informed of this decision in an August 1953 letter, but did not file a notice of disagreement or submit additional evidence. Therefore, the August 1953 rating decision is final and can only be reopened upon receipt of new and material evidence. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.156, 20.302, 20.1103. The evidence received since the August 1953 rating decision is not new or material to the claim of service connection for a back disability. The Veteran has not submitted any new evidence, medical or otherwise, to show that his back disability is related in any way to his four months of military service or was caused or aggravated by a service-connected disability. Rather, he has submitted statements indicating as belief that the disability is somehow related to service. However, this evidence is identical to the evidence considered in the August 1953 rating decision, and is therefore not material to the claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. While the Board regrets that a more favorable decision could not be reached on this issue, it must find from the evidence of record that new and material evidence has not been received, and reopening the claim for entitlement to service connection for a back disability is not warranted. The claim is denied. JEREMY J. OLSEN Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Hofmeister 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.