Citation Nr: 21015857 Decision Date: 03/18/21 Archive Date: 03/18/21 DOCKET NO. 16-01 876 DATE: March 18, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for a back disability is denied. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran’s back disability clearly and unmistakably pre-existed his active service and clearly and unmistakably was not aggravated by his active service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for a back disability have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1111 (2018); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304 (2019). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active military service from August 2007 to November 2007. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2015 rating decision issued by the VA Regional Office (RO). This case was previously before the Board in August 2018, at which time the issue currently on appeal was remanded for additional development. The Veteran has contended that his pre-existing back disability was aggravated by his active service. Alternatively, he argued that his back disability is directly related to his active service. He reported that he injured his during service. While acknowledging that he had a pre-existing back disability (“degenerative disc disease (DDD)”), he explained that his back (“thoracolumbar spine”) had been functionally impaired since his in-service injury. A review of pre-service private chiropractic records reflected that the Veteran experienced constant low and mid- back pain with neuropathy in November 2006. He reported that he hurt his back while lifting boxes and twisting. He added that he had been involved in a motor vehicle accident. He stated that his back pain worsened with standing, sitting, bending, lifting, and twisting. In December 2006, he was diagnosed with disorders of the sacrum, thoracic or lumbosacral neuritis/radiculitis, myalgia and myositis, and lumbar calcification discitis. Service treatment records (STRs) documented that the Veteran first reported sharp, low back pain after lifting a duffel bag in August 2007. Additionally, the Veteran reported having a history of low back pain. An August 2007 X-ray reflected mild spurring at L5-S1. Further, a September 2007 MRI revealed DDD at L4 and L5-S1, as well as disk herniation and nerve impingement. In October 2007, a Medical Evaluation Board determined that the Veteran’s chronic low back pain due to lumbar disc disease existed prior to service. At the time, the Veteran had reported that unrelenting low back pain since the start of basic training which was exacerbated by physical activity. Previously, the Veteran dealt with his back pain by avoiding physical activity. In March 2015, the Veteran was afforded a VA examination. The Veteran reported that he heard a “pop” after carrying heavy containers of water. The examiner noted that the Veteran’s STRs did not support that assertion. He determined that the Veteran had severe disc degeneration at L5-L1. He stated that the record showed a picture of DDD that began prior to service and was so symptomatic with the rigors of basic training that the Veteran was discharged for a pre-existing disability. He found no history of the Veteran’s reported injury. He concluded that the Veteran’s DDD has continued a course of gradual progression of symptomatic and radiographic changes. An addendum VA medical opinion was obtained in November 2019. The examiner opined that the Veteran had a thoracolumbar back condition that clearly and unmistakably existed prior to service. Moreover, he stated that the Veteran’s thoracolumbar back condition was clearly and unmistakably not aggravated by his active service. The examiner explained that the Veteran’s back pain during basic training was an exacerbation of pain in a person unaccustomed to any activity as the Veteran had avoided activity prior to his enlistment. Additionally, the examiner found no progression of the underlying condition during the Veteran’s active duty. The Board finds the VA medical opinions highly probative and weigh against the Veteran’s claim. In this regard, the examiners’ rationales are based on a review of the Veteran’s pertinent service- and pre-service medical records, and the examiners relied on their own training, knowledge, and expertise in rendering their opinions. Moreover, the Board finds that there is no competent medical opinion of record to the contrary. As such, the VA medical opinions are the most probative evidence of record. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303 (2007); Stefl v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 120 (2007); Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295 (2008). While the Veteran is competent to report observable symptoms of a back injury or disability, he is not competent to provide an opinion linking his back injury or disability to service as that requires medical expertise and is outside the realm of common knowledge of a layperson. Kahana v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 428 (2011); Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Therefore, the Veteran is not competent to provide an etiology opinion for his back disability. In sum, the Veteran was evaluated for back pain during service. However, there is no evidence that the Veteran’s pre-existing DDD was permanently aggravated by an in-service back injury. The November 2019 VA examiner did not find an additional back disability that was directly related to an in-service back injury. There is no competent evidence of record otherwise linking any diagnostic test findings to a service-related back injury. Furthermore, the November 2019 VA examiner opined that the Veteran’s back disability clearly and unmistakably pre-existed service, and clearly and unmistakably was not aggravated by his service. Accordingly, the Board finds that the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim and entitlement to service connection for a back disability is not warranted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b) (2018); Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). Kristin Haddock Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Ware, 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.