BVA Case 12-1295: Back

The examiner diagnosed DJD of the lumbar spine,but stated that he was unable to resolve the issue of nexus without resort to speculation.

In a December 2008 decision,the Board denied disability compensation benefits for DJD of the lumbar spine.

The parties agreed that the Board failed to adequately explain the bases for its conclusions that (1)there was no suggestion that the private chiropractor reviewed records dated prior to 2007,and (2) the October 2006 VA opinion was negative evidence against the claim, in light of the examiner's statement that he could not resolve the issue without resort to mere speculation.

In rendering its decision,the Board found that the duty to assist had been satisfied,noting that the appellant had not identified and the record otherwise did not indicate,any additional existing evidence necessary for a fair adjudication of the claim.

With regard to the conflicting medical evidence,the Board found the private chiropractor's opinion not probative because he did not have access to the claims file and failed to provide a rationale for his opinion.

Instead,the Board placed significant probative value on the June 2010 VA negative nexus opinion, noting that the examiner had reviewed the claims file, conducted a physical examination,and supported his opinion with adequate rationale.

Additionally,the Board found the October 2006 VA opinion persuasive because the examiner provided a rationale for why he could not give an opinion without resort to speculation.

Based upon its assessment of the credibility and probative weight of the evidence,the Board concluded that the preponderance of the evidence was against the claim.