Citation Nr: 21021535 Decision Date: 04/13/21 Archive Date: 04/13/21 DOCKET NO. 16-15 045 DATE: April 13, 2021 ORDER Service connection for degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine is granted. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran’s back condition had its onset in service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Air Force from January 1974 to July 1975. In April 2021, the Veteran and his wife testified at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. Service Connection In general, service connection may be granted for a disability or injury incurred in or aggravated by active military service. See 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. To prevail on a direct service connection claim, there must be competent evidence of (1) a current disability, (2) an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury, and (3) a nexus between the in-service disease or injury and the current disability. See Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1362, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009); 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Service connection may also be established by credible lay evidence and medical evidence provided by the Veteran or otherwise. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (2018). When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, VA shall resolve reasonable doubt in favor of the claimant. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). To deny a claim on its merits, the evidence must preponderate against the claim. See Alemany v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 518 (1996). Determinations as to service connection will be based on review of the entire evidence of record, to include all pertinent medical and lay evidence, with due consideration to VA’s policy to administer the law under a broad and liberal interpretation consistent with the facts in each individual case. See 38 U.S.C. § 1154 (a); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (a). The Board is charged with the duty to assess the credibility and weight given to evidence. Madden v. Gober, 125 F.3d 1477, 1481 (Fed. Cir. 1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1046 (1998); Wensch v. Principi, 15 Vet. App. 362, 367 (2001). Indeed, in Jefferson v. Principi, 271 F.3d 1072 (Fed. Cir. 2001), the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit), citing its decision in Madden, recognized that that Board had inherent fact-finding ability. Id. at 1076; see also 38 U.S.C. § 7104 (a) (West 2002). Moreover, the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) has declared that in adjudicating a claim, the Board has the responsibility to weigh and assess the evidence. Bryan v. West, 13 Vet. App. 482, 488-89 (2000); Wilson v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 614, 618 (1992). Back The Veteran reports that service connection for his back condition is warranted. In support, he stated at his April 2021 BVA hearing that during service he suffered a back injury and has had back problems ever since. See BVA hearing transcripts (April 2021). Moreover, his service treatment records show he suffered from back pain in service. See STR (November 1974 and April 1975). Additionally, the record confirms the Veteran’s diagnosis and VA medical treatment for the claimed condition. See VA medical treatment record (July 2012). The Veteran was diagnosed with degenerative disease of lumbar spine. See VA medical examination (March 2013). Thus, the Veteran has a current condition and establishes the first element for service connection. Additionally, the service treatment records show he suffered from back pain in service. See STR (November 1974 and April 1975). The Veteran’s records show complaints of back pain and treatment. Further, the Veteran provided sworn testimony explaining his back problems in service and treatments thereafter. See BVA hearing transcripts (April 2021). The evidence shows that the Veteran’s back condition is related to service, thus, service connection is warranted. See Flynn v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 500, 503 (1994) (noting that “the element of cause and effect has been totally by-passed in favor of a simple temporal relationship between the incurrence of the disability and the period of active duty”). The Board finds that the evidence linking the Veteran’s back condition to service is probative, competent and credible. Further, the Board also finds that the competent and credible medical and lay evidence, including the Veteran’s sworn testimony, statements shows that his back condition began during service and have been recurrent since that time. See BVA hearing transcript (April 2021). The Veteran is competent to report his back condition that began in service and the Board finds the Veteran’s statements credible. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (a)(2); Washington v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 362, 368 (2005); Layno. The Board finds that the medical and lay evidence is consistent with other evidence of record, and further finds that it is competent and credible. The Board finds that the evidence, including the Veteran’s sworn testimony, shows that the Veteran’s back condition had its onset in service and have been recurrent since that time. Resolving all reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, the Board finds that the Veteran’s degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine had its onset during his period of military service. As such, service connection is warranted. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). STEVEN D. REISS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Alvarado- 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.