Citation Nr: 21013211 Decision Date: 03/09/21 Archive Date: 03/09/21 DOCKET NO. 17-18 680 DATE: March 9, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for degenerative disc disease, to the cervical spine is granted. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran’s degenerative disc disease to the cervical spine is related to his military service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to service connection for degenerative disc disease to the cervical spine have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served in the Army from October 2004 to April 2008. This case is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2015 Regional Office (RO) rating decision. The Veteran testified at a February 2021 videoconference hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. Service Connection The law provides that service connection may be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active military service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304. Service connection may be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). Generally, establishing service connection requires medical or, in certain circumstances, lay evidence of (1) a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the present disability. See Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313, 1316 (Fed. Cir. 2009); Hickson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 247, 253 (1999). 1. Entitlement to service connection for degenerative disc disease to the cervical spine The Veteran is seeking entitlement to service connection a cervical spine condition. Specifically, the Veteran asserts that his cervical spine condition is related to three improvised explosive device (IED) attacks that occurred during service. Based on the evidence as detailed below, the Veteran's claim is granted. Initially, the Board notes that the Veteran is in receipt of the Combat Action Badge. Therefore, the Veteran is entitled to the application of 38 U.S.C. § 1154(b) for combat veterans. Section 1154(b) aids the combat veteran by relaxing the adjudicative evidentiary requirements for determining what happened in service. The Veteran’s service treatment records reveal that the Veteran was a victim of an IED blast in 2007. The Veteran reported that the IED hit the driver’s side and he was dazed, confused, and saw stars. He further reported that he was unsure if he hit his head, but had a headache and felt nauseous on his way back in. After taking into consideration his combat experience, the Board finds that he is both competent and credible to report being the victim of an IED explosion. As to whether his currently diagnosed cervical spine condition is related to service, the Board finds that the positive and negative evidence is at least in equipoise. Specifically, the Veteran provided three buddy statements from his fellow service members that describe an IED attack that occurred in 2007 in which the Veteran was knocked down and sustained injuries. The Veteran’s post service treatment records reveal complaints of neck pain and a diagnosis mild degenerative changes from C4-C7. Further, the Veteran underwent surgery in 2015 for his cervical spine condition and the surgeon noted the Veteran’s significant trauma history while in the military where he sustained multiple traumas including bomb detonation. The Board finds that the medical evidence of record, along with the statements from the Veteran and his fellow service members, supports a grant of service connection for a cervical spine condition. Therefore, giving the Veteran the benefit of the doubt, the Board finds that service connection is warranted for cervical strain. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. 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. B.T. KNOPE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Vample, Erica