Citation Nr: 21032528 Decision Date: 05/27/21 Archive Date: 05/27/21 DOCKET NO. 19-10 899 DATE: May 27, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a back disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from May 1945 to July 1946. These matters come before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2016 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) regional office. The Veteran initially requested a Board hearing but withdrew his request in April 2020. The Board remanded the appeal for further development in February 2021. 1. Entitlement to service connection for a back disability is remanded. 2. Entitlement to service connection for carpal tunnel syndrome is remanded. While further delay is regrettable, the Board finds remand is again necessary. In that regard, VA examinations and opinions were obtained in March 2021 pursuant to the Board's remand. The examiner provided negative opinions with respect to both disabilities. In support of the opinions, the examiner noted only the lack of documentation of injuries in the Veteran's service treatment records and the amount of time that has passed since the Veteran's service. As this is not a sufficient basis for a negative opinion, the Board finds remand is warranted so that new opinions may be obtained to adequately address the question of whether the Veteran's back disability and bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome are related to service. Updated VA treatment records, as well as any relevant private treatment records identified by the Veteran, should be obtained and associated with the claims file. The matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Ask the Veteran to identify all outstanding treatment records relevant to his back disability and carpal tunnel syndrome claims. All identified VA records should be added to the claims file. All other properly identified records should be obtained if the necessary authorization to obtain the records is provided by the Veteran. If any records are not available, or the Veteran identifies sources of treatment but does not provide authorization to obtain records, appropriate action should be taken (see 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)-(e)), to include notifying the Veteran of the unavailability of the records. 2. After records development is completed, the claims file should be sent to an appropriate examiner to offer an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) that any current back disability had onset during service or is otherwise related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. In offering the opinion, the examiner is asked to consider the Veteran's lay statements regarding the mechanism of his injury and onset of symptoms. The examiner should note that a lack of documentation in the Veteran's service treatment records alone is not a sufficient basis upon which to rest a negative opinion. The need for an examination is left to the discretion of the examiner. A rationale for all opinions offered is requested as adjudicators are precluded from making any medical findings. 3. After records development is completed, the claims file should be sent to an appropriate examiner to offer an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) that carpal tunnel syndrome had onset during service or is otherwise related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. In offering the opinion, the examiner is asked to consider the Veteran's lay statements regarding the mechanism of his injury and onset of symptoms. The examiner should note that a lack of documentation in the Veteran's service treatment records alone is not a sufficient basis upon which to rest a negative opinion. (Continued on the next page) The need for an examination is left to the discretion of the examiner. A rationale for all opinions offered is requested as adjudicators are precluded from making any medical findings. M. Mills Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board M. D. Bruce, 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.