Citation Nr: 21015533 Decision Date: 03/17/21 Archive Date: 03/17/21 DOCKET NO. 15-19 544 DATE: March 17, 2021 REMANDED The claim of entitlement to service connection for a back disorder is remanded. The claim of entitlement to service connection for a left leg disorder is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from May 1970 to May 1973. These matters come before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2014 rating decision of the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Jackson, Mississippi. The above issues were previously before the Board in July 2018 and June 2019 at which times they were remanded for additional development. The claims of entitlement to service connection for a back disorder and a left leg disorder are remanded. The Veteran submitted an initial claim for service connection for back and left leg disorders in March 2013, contending that he experienced injuries to the legs and back in in-service jeep accidents that occurred in Germany in 1971 and/or 1972. The Veteran’s available service treatment records (STRs) are negative for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident but do show that he was treated for back pain in January 1971 and hurt his leg playing football in October 1972. However, a December 1972 separation examination shows a normal spine and lower extremities. Post-service VA treatment records show complaints of back and leg pain as early as April 2014, noting an onset of such pain approximately 15 to 16 years earlier (i.e., approximately 1998/99) and a May 2014 VA magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan of the lumbar spine shows degenerative disc disease (DDD). In connection with the Veteran’s claim, he was afforded VA spine and knee examinations in February 2014. The examiner diagnosed degenerative arthritis of the spine and right knee chondromalacia, but did not indicate whether the Veteran had a left leg disorder. Significantly, the examiner opined that the Veteran’s claimed back and left leg disorders were less likely than not (less than 50 percent probability) incurred in or caused by the claimed in-service injury, event or illness. As rationale for this opinion, the examiner noted that STRs were negative for a traumatic injury to his knee or back and that both right knee chondromalacia and DDD of the lumbar spine are very common multifactorial diseases and unlikely related to his active military service. As the February 2014 VA examiner failed to consider the January 1971 and October 1972 complaints of back and left leg pain, the Board remanded the claim in June 2019 to obtain new examinations/opinions. Significantly, a December 2019 VA spine examination shows diagnoses of degenerative arthritis of the spine as well as intervertebral disc syndrome, and the examiner provided a positive nexus opinion, indicating that the Veteran’s claimed back disorder was at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) incurred in or caused by the Veteran’s military service. The examiner reasoned that “[i]t is documented in the medical record that the Veteran was in a vehicle accident in 1972--Germany and sustained injuries when the Jeep he was riding in rolled over.” A December 2019 VA knee examination shows diagnoses of bilateral knee joint osteoarthritis as well as status post left knee fracture and the examiner also provided a positive nexus opinion, indicating that the Veteran’s claimed left leg disorder was at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) incurred in or caused by the Veteran’s military service as “’[w]hen [the Veteran] was in a[n] accident aboard a APC, [he] injured [his] knee and… was thrown to the floor… [his] knee was fractured’ in 1972.” As the December 2019 VA medical opinions were based on the Veteran’s claimed in-service motor vehicle accident(s) and such accident(s) have not actually been confirmed, addendum medical opinions were obtained in October 2020. Significantly, the October 2020 VA examiner provided negative nexus opinions which address the documented in-service complaints of back and left leg pain in January 1971 and October 1972 but indicate that there are no other documented complaints of back/left leg pain in service and that the Veteran’s claimed disorders are likely age-related. More recently, in December 2020 correspondence, the Veteran provided more details regarding his claimed in-service motor vehicle accident. Specifically, he indicated that the accident occurred in Germany while he was assigned to Delta Company, 3rd Infantry Division, 10th Engineers around March or April 1972 and was treated at the Larson Barracks and Hoensville, Germany. While the Veteran’s STRs have been obtained through standard practices, it is unclear whether these records are complete and/or whether there are outstanding STRs from the Larson Barracks and/or Hoensville, Germany. Significantly, there is no indication in the record that the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) attempted to contact any other potential repositories for the alleged missing STRs, such as the VA Records Management Center (RMC) or U.S. Joint Services Records Research Center (JSRRC). Furthermore, while many of the Veteran’s service personnel records (SPRs) are already of record, additional SPRs, to include morning reports, may corroborate the Veteran’s allegation of an in-service motor vehicle accident. Accordingly, on remand the AOJ must make as many requests as necessary to obtain any outstanding STRs and/or SPRs until the AOJ determines that either the records do not exist or that further efforts to obtain those records would be futile. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Contact any appropriate sources to obtain any outstanding STRs and/or SPRs related to the Veteran’s alleged motor vehicle accident in Germany while he was assigned to Delta Company, 3rd Infantry Division, 10th Engineers around March or April 1972 and was treated at the Larson Barracks and Hoensville, Germany, to include sick and morning reports. In making any request, clearly identify the source(s) contacted. All records and/or responses received should be associated with the claims file. Bethany L. Buck Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board April Maddox, 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.