Citation Nr: 22002995 Decision Date: 01/20/22 Archive Date: 01/20/22 DOCKET NO. 191010-38098 DATE: January 20, 2022 ORDER Service connection for arthritis of the cervical spine is granted. FINDING OF FACT A medical nexus exists between an in-service incurrence and arthritis of the cervical spine. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for a neck disability have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1110, 1112, 1113, 1116; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304, 3.307, 3.309. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty for training from August 1967 to December 1967 and on active duty from July 1969 to November 1970. This matter comes to the Board of Appeals for Veterans' Claims (Board) originally after the Veteran perfected an appeal under the legacy appeals system of a July 2015 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Appeals (VA) Regional Office (RO). In June 2018, the Veteran opted into the Rapid Appeals Management Program (RAMP); selecting the Higher-Level Review lane. A RAMP rating decision was issued in April 2019. In October 2019, the Veteran timely appealed the RAMP rating decision to the Board and opted into the Direct Review docket. Therefore, the Veteran does not desire a personal hearing before the Board, and the evidentiary record closed on April 5, 2019; the date the Veteran was notified of the October 2019 RAMP rating decision on appeal. Service connection for arthritis of the cervical spine is granted. At issue is whether the Veteran is entitled to service connection for a neck disability. The weight of the evidence indicates that the Veteran is entitled to service connection for arthritis of the cervical spine. The Veteran's current treatment records indicate that the Veteran had a diagnosis of myofascial syndrome of the neck and degenerative joint disease of the cervical spine. The Veteran's service treatment records indicate that the Veteran fell from a helicopter during a period of service. An August 2011 private medical opinion indicated that that the Veteran injured his neck during an in-service fall from a helicopter causing incorrect spinal alignment and an abnormal cervical curvature. A December 2014 private medical opinion indicated that the Veteran had a cervical spine pain and chronic myositis which the private provider indicated was more likely than not related to the Veteran's military service. The weight of the evidence indicates that the Veteran is manifesting some sort of joint pain of the cervical spine which for the purposes of assigning a disability rating appears to be best characterized as arthritis of the cervical spine. The record also contains two competent medical opinions indicating that the Veteran's neck disability was caused by a helicopter fall during a period of service, and the Veteran's service treatment records document a fall from a helicopter. Therefore, the weight of the evidence of record is sufficient to demonstrate a medical nexus between a current disability and an in-service incurrence. The Board is cognizant that the record contains medical evidence (including VA medical opinions) suggesting that the Veteran is not entitled to service connection. Nevertheless, the Board finds the August 2011 and December 2014 opinions sufficiently persuasive to place a reasonable factfinder in a state of equipoise, and the tie must go to the Veteran. Here, the weight of the probative evidence of record indicates that the Veteran is entitled to service connection for arthritis of the cervical spine. Therefore, the evidence in this case is evenly balanced enough so as to allow application of the benefit-of-the-doubt rule as required by law and VA regulations. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. As such, entitlement to service connection for arthritis of the cervical spine is granted. DAVID L. WIGHT Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board David R. Seaton, 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.