Citation Nr: 21026532
Decision Date: 05/03/21	Archive Date: 05/03/21

DOCKET NO. 16-28 112
DATE: May 3, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to service connection for a neck disorder is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran had active military service from August 1973 to August 1977.  This matter is on appeal from a November 2014 rating decision.  It was previously remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) in November 2018. 

The Board cannot make a fully-informed decision in this appeal because no VA examiner has provided an adequate opinion.  The case was remanded to provide the Veteran with a VA examination.  He had a VA examination in September 2019, and the examiner provided a negative opinion.  However, the rationale was that there was no documentation in the Veteran's service treatment records of a neck or cervical spine condition and there were no reports in available records relating to a neck condition until a January 1990 claim.  The examiner did not address the Veteran's competent reports of an in-service injury as directed by the Board's remand.  Moreover, the examiner did not address the clinical significance of a July 1984 motor vehicle accident, which resulted in fractures of the arm and injuries to his chest and head.  A remand for an additional medical opinion is necessary.  

The matter is REMANDED for the following action:

Obtain an addendum medical opinion from the September 2019 VA neck conditions examiner (or, if unavailable, from a medical professional with appropriate expertise) to determine the etiology of the diagnosed neck disorder.  The examiner is requested to review the record and offer an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e., probability of approximately 50 percent) that the diagnosed neck disorder is related to the Veteran's military service. 

The examiner should discuss the Veteran's competent reports of incurring a neck injury in 1973.  The examiner should also address the clinical significance of the Veteran's July 1984 motor vehicle accident, which resulted in fractures of the arm and injuries to his chest and head.  A complete rationale should be given for all opinions and conclusions expressed.  If the examiner cannot provide an opinion without restoring to speculation, the examiner should explain why.  The examiner is reminded that the absence of evidence is not a sufficient rationale for a negative nexus opinion.  

 

 

Marissa Caylor

Acting Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	L. Barstow, 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.