Citation Nr: 21007303 Decision Date: 02/09/21 Archive Date: 02/09/21 DOCKET NO. 15-46 324 DATE: February 9, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for a chronic back disability is denied. FINDING OF FACT The preponderance of the evidence is against find the Veteran currently has, or has had during the pendency of this appeal, a diagnosis of a back disability, to include pain of such severity to cause functional impairment of earning capacity. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to service connection for a back condition, including as secondary to his service-connected right knee disability have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.310.   REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Navy from December 1987 to December 1991. This matter comes before the Board from July 2013 rating decision. The Veteran appeared before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge at a Board hearing in January 2019. The transcript is in the record. The matter was remanded by the Board in June 2019. 1. Entitlement to service connection for a back condition, including as secondary to his service-connected right knee disability The Veteran contends back pains him at work when he bends over to evaluate cables, and that he needs to take breaks at work due to his back pain. He adds that he drives a lot for work and his back pains him during this too. He relates his back pain due to his service-connected right knee disability. Alternatively, he argues that he began experiencing back pain in-service and it has persisted to the present. Service connection may be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. The three-element test for service connection requires evidence of: (1) a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the current disability and the in-service disease or injury. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166 -67 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Service connection may also be established on a secondary basis for a disability that is proximately due to, or the result of, a service-connected disability. 38 C.F.R. § 3.310 (a). To establish secondary service connection, the record must show: (1) evidence of a current disability; (2) evidence of a service-connected disability; and (3) a connection between the service-connected disability and the current disability. See Wallin v. West, 11 Vet. App. 509, 511 (1998). A VA examination of the back was conducted in December 2019. At that time, the Veteran reported that he experienced flare-ups of back pain in connection with his duties as a lead quality control inspector for Panasonic Avionics. He said the pain occurred whenever he bent over to inspect cables or flies, and it would stop when he stopped bending over. He gave a remote past history of being seen by physicians for his back pain and being told that there was nothing that could be done. He denied any current treatment for his back. Following a physical examination, review of the record, and consideration of the Veteran’s lay reports, the examiner determined that there is no pathology or diagnosis of a condition of the thoracolumbar spine. It was also determined that there was no chronic or disabling condition. The examiner emphasized that the record was silent for any complaints, work up for, diagnosis of, or treatment for any back complaints since 1990. As to the Veteran’s report that no physician was willing to treat him for his back complaints, the examiner observed that there were no records to corroborate such a history, and it seemed incredulous that the Veteran would be repeatedly denied treatment if there was actually some problem. Based on the findings of December 2019 VA examination, the Board concludes that the Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of a back disability and has not had one at any time during the pendency of the claim or recent to the filing of the claim. Romanowsky v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 289, 294 (2013); McClain v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 319, 321 (2007). The Board has considered the guidance of Saunders v. Wilkie, 886 F.3d 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2018) that “pain alone, without an accompanying diagnosis of a present disease, can qualify as a disability” if it “reaches the level of a functional impairment of earning capacity.” Id. at 1367-69. The Veteran’s report of functional impairment related to the low back has been considered. However, as discussed above, the competent medical evidence finding no evidence of a disability of the back or functional impairment of the low back is afforded significant weight by the Board in this case. None of the limitations the Veteran reports as due to his back pain impairs his earning capacity. The Board finds the Veteran’s back pain does not rise to severity of impairment of earning capacity as there is no evidence in the claims file to indicate the Veteran has lost income due to his back pain alone. While the Veteran believes he has a current diagnosis of a back disability, including back pain, he is not competent to provide a diagnosis in this case. The issue is medically complex, as it requires specialized medical education Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377, 1377 n.4 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Consequently, the Board gives more probative weight to the competent medical evidence. MICHAEL A. HERMAN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board E. Rekowski 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.