Citation Nr: 22015692 Decision Date: 03/18/22 Archive Date: 03/18/22 DOCKET NO. 17-22 146 DATE: March 18, 2022 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a back disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Navy from July 1972 to January 1974. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2014 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). This case was previously before the Board in September 2019 and October 2021, at which time the issue currently on appeal was remanded for additional development. The matter has since been returned to the Board for further appellate action. Pursuant to the October 2021 Board remand, the RO obtained a VA medical opinion in October 2021. The examiner opined that it was less likely as not that the Veteran's back disability had its onset during or was other etiologically related to his active service. In support of this opinion, the examiner noted that the Veteran's was treated for back pain during service in April 1973 and October 1973. However, the examiner pointed out that the Veteran answered "no" to having recurrent back pain at his separation examination in January 1974. The examiner stated that the Veteran's medical records showed that the Veteran complained of back pain that "began two weeks ago" in November 1995, which was twenty years after his separation from service. The examiner added that a lumbar spine X-ray showed mild arthritis in 2004. The examiner reasoned that any injury that occurred in service would not have resulted in a mild severity of arthritis after such an extensive time gap of decades. However, the Board finds that the October 2021 VA examiner did not address the Veteran's statements regarding the continuity of his back pain since his separation from service. Furthermore, the examiner did not consider the mechanism of injury to the Veteran's back, including continuously hitting his back on tie down hooks under A-4s. Compliance with a remand is not discretionary, and failure to comply with the terms of a remand necessitates remand for corrective action. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). Additionally, the Board finds that the October 2021 VA examiner did not comment on the Veteran's article submission in August 2021 stating that '"degeneration [of the intervertebral disc] often results from small injuries that may not cause pain at the time the injuries actually occur."' Therefore, an addendum VA medical opinion is warranted. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Identify and obtain any pertinent, outstanding VA and private treatment records and associate them with the claims file. 2. Then, return the claims file to a VA examiner with sufficient expertise for an addendum opinion to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran's back disability. The claims file must be made available to and reviewed by the examiner. If a new VA examination is required, then one should be scheduled. Based on a review of the record, the examiner should provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or better probability) that the Veteran's back disability is etiologically related to his active service. The examiner must comment on the mechanism of injury to the Veteran's back from repetitive hitting on tiedown hooks, the article on repetitive injuries submitted in August 2021, and the continuity of his symptomatology since service. The rationale for all opinions expressed must be provided. 3. Confirm that VA examination report and all medical opinions provided comport with this remand and undertake any other development determined to be warranted. 4. Then, readjudicate the appeal. If the decision remains adverse to the Veteran, issue a supplemental statement of the case and allow the appropriate time for response. Then, return the case to the Board. D. Ware Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Xiong, 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.