Citation Nr: 21011019 Decision Date: 02/26/21 Archive Date: 02/26/21 DOCKET NO. 17-37 155 DATE: February 26, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a thoracolumbar spine disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from April 1967 to December 1969. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2017 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). Addressing the relevant procedural history, the Board previously denied the Veteran’s claim for service connection for a thoracolumbar spine disability in December of 2019. The Veteran appealed that denial to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In response to a September 2020 Joint Motion for Remand, the Court vacated and remanded the Veteran’s claim to the Board. The Board finds that a remand for further development is necessary in lieu of the Joint Motion for Remand. In this case, the Veteran contends his current back disability began during and was caused by an injury during service when his truck hit a landmine. In support of the claim, the Veteran submitted pictures of a truck that had been damaged. In the Joint Motion for Remand, the parties agreed that the Board erred when, despite finding that the Veteran was competent to report being involved in a truck accident in service, it did not adequately address whether his lay statements that he was involved in the reported accident were credible. Further, and more relevant to this remand, the parties agreed that the Board did not sufficiently explain why a VA examination had not been obtained to address whether the Veteran’s back disability was caused by or is related to his active duty service. As such, the Board cannot make a fully-informed decision on the matter at hand until the Veteran is afforded the opportunity to submit evidence in order to assist with substantiating his assertions as well as to attend a VA examination and have an addendum authored concurrently. The matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Contact the Veteran and his representative and ask him to submit any outstanding evidence that could help substantiate his assertions of his involvement in an in-service truck accident. Give the Veteran and his representative a reasonable amount of time to respond and document all efforts related to this action in the claims file. If no response is received, adjudicate the case based on the evidence of record. 2. Following the completion of step one, schedule the Veteran for a VA examination with an appropriate medical professional to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran’s back condition. The medical professional must be provided with and review the entire claims file, to include a copy of this remand AND the outstanding service records. Following a review of the evidence of record, to include the Veteran’s lay statements (the credibility of which is not yet determined), the medical professional should opine: (a.) Whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or higher) that the Veteran’s back condition began during or is etiologically related to his active duty service. In so opining, the medical professional is asked to reconcile, to the extent possible, the Veteran’s assertion that his current back disability began during and was caused by an injury during service when his truck hit a landmine. The examiner should address whether any current disorder is consistent with such an injury or is instead more consistent with another potential etiology such as age-related changes. The medical professional should provide a full description of the disability and report all signs and symptoms necessary for evaluating the Veteran’s disability. A complete rationale should be provided for all opinions given. If the medical professional is unable to provide this opinion without resorting to speculation, he or she must indicate why this is so. (Continued on the next page)   3. Thereafter, if the benefits sought on appeal remain denied, the Veteran and his representative should be provided a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC). After the Veteran and his representative have been given the applicable time to submit additional argument, the claims should be returned to the Board for further review. MICHAEL MARTIN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board K. Smith, 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.