HIP IMPAIRMENT OF

S. KIM · 2026 · Case ID: A26014840

GRANTED

Summary

The veteran, who served from August 1988 to August 2008, appeals the denial of service connection for an unspecified right hip disorder and chronic rhinitis. The right hip claim was denied due to a lack of diagnosis and a negative nexus opinion from the VA examiner, who found the condition not related to service-connected knee conditions. The veteran argued the hip pain was secondary to his service-connected knee conditions, citing lay testimony and a private medical opinion from Dr. C.M.B. that found a positive nexus. The Board found the veteran's lay testimony regarding hip pain credible and that it impaired his earning capacity, constituting a current disability. The Board also found the private opinion persuasive, noting the pathophysiology linking knee issues to hip problems, and thus granted service connection for the right hip disorder as secondary to his service-connected knee conditions. For the rhinitis claim, the Board noted the AOJ's subsequent grant of service connection for allergic rhinitis, making the issue before the Board whether the condition existed during the period on appeal. Despite a negative VA examination finding no diagnosis, the Board found the veteran's in-service treatment for rhinitis and his competent reports of ongoing symptoms to be persuasive. The Board found the evidence in approximate balance and resolved the doubt in the veteran's favor, granting service connection for chronic rhinitis.

Rationale

Veteran has current right hip disability due to pain impairing earning capacity.; Private medical opinion found positive nexus between knee conditions and hip disorder.; Board found veteran's lay testimony credible and evidence persuasive.

Special Benefit

NO SPECIAL BENEFIT

Docket No.

241211-504248

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: A26014840
Decision Date: 02/18/26 Archive Date: 02/18/26

DOCKET NO. 241211-504248
DATE: February 18, 2026

ORDER

1. Entitlement to service connection for an unspecified right hip disorder is granted, secondary to the Veteran's Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome with Meniscal Tear, Left Knee; and Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome, Right Knee ("service-connected knee conditions").

2. Entitlement to service connection for chronic rhinitis, allergic or non-allergic, is granted.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. The Veteran's service-connected knee conditions caused him to walk with an antalgic gait, resulting in right hip pain that limits his ability to sit, stand, and walk for prolonged periods of time, and otherwise engage in physical activity.

2. The Veteran has a current chronic rhinitis disability.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for an unspecified right hip disorder secondary to the Veteran's service-connected knee conditions have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 1137; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304, 3.310.

2. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for chronic rhinitis, allergic or non-allergic, have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1119, 1120, 1131, 1137, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304, 3.307, 3.309.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

The Veteran served on active duty from August 1988 to August 2008.

The Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) issued a rating decision denying the Veteran's claim for an unspecified right hip disorder in June 2021 and a rating decision denying the Veteran's claim for service connection for rhinitis in August 2024. These constitute initial decisions; therefore, the modernized review system, also known as the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA), applies.

In February 2022, the Veteran submitted a VA Form 20-0996, Decision Review Request: Higher-Level Review (HLR), and requested review of the June 2021 decision. In February 2022, AOJ issued a decision denying the Veteran's right hip claim, which considered the evidence of record at the time of the June 2021 decision.

In November 2022, the Veteran submitted a VA Form 20-0995, Decision Review Request: Supplemental Claim, and requested readjudication of entitlement to service connection for a right hip condition. In May 2023, the AOJ issued a supplemental claim decision which found that new and relevant evidence had been received and denied the claim based on the evidence of record at the time of that decision.

Following a June 2023 request for HLR of the May 2023 decision, the AOJ found a duty-to-assist error and returned the Veteran's right hip claim to the supplemental claim lane. Following additional development, the AOJ issued a September 2024 rating decision denying the claim.

Following an August 2024 request for HLR of the August 2024 decision regarding the Veteran's rhinitis claim, and a September 2024 request for HLR of the September 2024 decision regarding his right hip claim, the AOJ issued the December 2024 decision on appeal denying the Veteran's claims for service connection for rhinitis and a right hip condition.

In the December 2024 VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement), the Veteran elected the Direct Review docket. Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the August 2024 AOJ decision regarding the Veteran's rhinitis claim, and the evidence of record at the time of the September 2024 decision regarding his right hip claim, which were subsequently subject to HLR. 38 C.F.R. § 20.301. If evidence was submitted during the period after the AOJ issued the decisions which were subsequently subject to HLR, the Board did not consider it in its decision. 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.300, 20.301, 20.801.

If the Veteran would like VA to consider any evidence that was submitted that the Board could not consider, the Veteran may file a Supplemental Claim (VA Form 20-0995) and submit or identify this evidence. 38 C.F.R. § 3.2501. If
at the time of the September 2024 decision regarding his right hip claim, which were subsequently subject to HLR. 38 C.F.R. § 20.301. If evidence was submitted during the period after the AOJ issued the decisions which were subsequently subject to HLR, the Board did not consider it in its decision. 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.300, 20.301, 20.801.

If the Veteran would like VA to consider any evidence that was submitted that the Board could not consider, the Veteran may file a Supplemental Claim (VA Form 20-0995) and submit or identify this evidence. 38 C.F.R. § 3.2501. If the evidence is new and relevant, VA will issue another decision on the claim, considering the new evidence in addition to the evidence previously considered. Id. Specific instructions for filing a Supplemental Claim are included with this decision.

1. Entitlement to service connection for unspecified right hip disorder

The Veteran contends that he has a current right hip disability that is related to his service. Specifically, he asserts that it is a result of hip pain he began experiencing during service; alternatively, he asserts that his current hip disability is a result of his service-connected knee conditions.

The Veteran reported in a February 2021 Statement that he is "seeking service-connection for my Right Hip Condition secondary to my painful service-connected [knee conditions], which has caused me to walk unevenly. My symptoms consist of pain, looseness, weakness, and muscle fatigue. . . ."

In a November 2022 brief, the Veteran's representative argued that "[t]he Veteran has a formal diagnosis of Right Hip Condition that is secondary to the Veteran's current service-connected [knee conditions] with associated compensatory posture and movement with biomechanical and kinematic changes."

Service connection may be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. The three-element test for service connection requires evidence of: (1) a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the current disability and the in-service disease or injury. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166-67 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

Service connection will be granted if the evidence demonstrates that a current disability resulted from an injury or disease incurred in or aggravated by active service, even if the disability was initially diagnosed after service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303.

Service connection is also warranted for disability proximately due to or the result of a service-connected disease or injury. 38 C.F.R. § 3.310(a). Such secondary service connection is warranted for any increase in severity of a nonservice-connected disability that is proximately due to or the result of a service-connected disease or injury. 38 C.F.R. § 3.310(b); see also Spicer v. McDonough, 61 F.4th 1360, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 2023) (holding all that is needed is a "but for" causation or aggravation to show entitlement to secondary service connection).

A veteran who served during a period of war, or after December 31, 1946, will be considered to have been in sound condition when examined, accepted and enrolled for service, except as to defects, infirmities, or disorders noted at entrance into service, or where clear and unmistakable (obvious or manifest) evidence demonstrates that an injury or disease existed prior to service and was not aggravated by such service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1111, 1137; 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (b).

When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, the Secretary shall give the benefit of the doubt to the Veteran. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102.

Throughout the period on appeal, the Veteran has been service-connected for his right knee patellofemoral pain syndrome and left knee patellofemoral pain syndrome with meniscal tear. The issues in this appeal are whether the Veteran has a current right hip disability; and if so, whether such disability is a result of his military service, either directly or as the result of his service-connected knee conditions.

The Veteran's service records are silent for complaints of right hip pain.

The Veteran's VA records do not reflect treatment for right hip pain. During an October
Secretary shall give the benefit of the doubt to the Veteran. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102.

The Veteran's service records are silent for complaints of right hip pain.

The Veteran's VA records do not reflect treatment for right hip pain. During an October 2021 VA airborne hazard/burn pit registry initial evaluation, the Veteran reported that he was experiencing "Pain: 7/10 (Sciatic Nerve pain in right hip)."

On VA hip examination in March 2021, the medical history of the Veteran's right hip condition was noted to be "nonspecific right hip pain in 1990 associated with routine wear and tear. No isolated trauma. No active issues. Exam is normal." The VA examiner noted that the Veteran's condition was resolved, with no current symptoms. The examiner noted that the Veteran reported no functional loss or functional impairment of the right hip. On physical examination, range of motion measurements of the right hip were all normal. No x-rays were provided, and the examiner stated the Veteran did not have a current diagnosis associated with the claimed condition.

The March 2021 VA examiner rendered a negative nexus opinion regarding the Veteran's right hip claim with the following rationale: "[The] Veteran's claimed right hip condition is not related to [service-connected] patellofemoral pain syndrome with meniscal tear, left knee. There are no medical records found supporting such nexus."

After receiving the Veteran's November 2022 Supplemental Claim along with a private positive nexus opinion, discussed below, the AOJ obtained a VA medical opinion. The VA examiner rendered a negative nexus opinion with the following rationale:

After reviewing records, do not find any diagnosis or right hip condition. Has been followed by Orthopedics for his joint conditions and Jan 20, 2023 noted about his back and bilateral knees but no mention of any hip condition. Therefore, it is less likely than not that he has any right hip condition.

On VA hip examination in May 2023, the examiner noted that the Veteran did not have any diagnosis associated with the claimed condition. The medical history of the Veteran's right hip condition was noted to be that the

Veteran says he developed right hip pain in 1989 during [air]borne status. He reports hard landings, wearing heavy gear. Says he was a helicop[t]er mechanic and did a lot of climbing and jumping, as well as falls during his 20 years of service. During service he did not seek treatment. Post discharge he has not sought treatment. Chronic pain level 8/10. Takes naproxen 250mg x 4 tabs for pain relief. He has not had x-ray prior to today and x-ray completed today at this visit does not [identify] any pathology.

The Veteran reported current functional impairment of the right hip, specifically "pain in the hip when walking or standing for extended periods." On physical examination, range of motion measurements of the right hip were all normal; however, the examiner noted that pain was exhibited during both active and passive range-of-motion testing on flexion, abduction, and internal rotation of the right hip. The examiner indicated that there was no evidence of pain, but also noted evidence of pain on active and passive motion. Objective evidence of pain on palpation was also found, specifically "moderate lateral right hip pain when palpated." The examiner noted that procured evidence suggests pain and lack of endurance which significantly limits functional ability with repeated use over time, with estimated range-of-motion immediately after repeated use over time being flexion endpoint of 120 out of 125 degrees, extension endpoint of 20 out of 30 degrees, abduction endpoint of 40 out of 45 degrees, adduction endpoint of 20 out of 25 degrees, external rotation endpoint of 50 out of 60 degrees, and internal rotation endpoint of 30 out of 40 degrees. The examiner noted that this estimate was based on "veteran statements, record review and examination findings used to estimate range of motion over time." The Veteran was not noted to use any assistive devices as a normal mode of locomotion. May 2023 imaging studies were noted to have been conducted, which showed "Right hip series within normal limits for age." The examiner stated "no" in response to the question "do the conditions listed in the diagnosis section impact his/her ability to perform any type of occupational task (such as standing
of 45 degrees, adduction endpoint of 20 out of 25 degrees, external rotation endpoint of 50 out of 60 degrees, and internal rotation endpoint of 30 out of 40 degrees. The examiner noted that this estimate was based on "veteran statements, record review and examination findings used to estimate range of motion over time." The Veteran was not noted to use any assistive devices as a normal mode of locomotion. May 2023 imaging studies were noted to have been conducted, which showed "Right hip series within normal limits for age." The examiner stated "no" in response to the question "do the conditions listed in the diagnosis section impact his/her ability to perform any type of occupational task (such as standing, walking, lifting, sitting, etc.)." The examiner noted that there was evidence of pain on passive range of motion testing; no evidence of pain when the joint is used in non-weight bearing. The examiner further remarked that

After examination of the veteran's hip condition, listening to his complete history and current subjective complaints, combined with a review of the available records, I have no basis to deny additional losses of function or motion when it comes to repetitive use over time or during a flare-ups.

On VA hip examination in September 2024, the examiner noted that the Veteran "has claimed a disability pattern related to unspecified right hip disorder," but found no diagnosis related to the claimed condition. Regarding the medical history of the Veteran's right hip condition, the examiner stated that the Veteran indicated that he had not received treatment for his right hip condition, and that "he was trying to put claim in for sciatica (pain coming down his leg), due to his lower back pain." On physical examination, range of motion measurements of the right hip were all normal. The examiner noted no evidence of pain on examination. No functional loss or factors contributing to disability were noted. The examiner further remarked that there was

not enough objective medical evidence, to include the physical exam (negative, normal) to render a chronic diagnosis. There is no evidence that this condition was ever evaluated, treated, or diagnosed. [The] Veteran had normal hip xray and examination findings at his [May 2023 VA examination], no diagnosis was given. Evidence does not support finding of a current or chronic condition or diagnosis related to this claimed condition.

The Veteran submitted an April 2022 medical opinion from Dr. C.M.B., a private physician, who rendered the following positive nexus opinion:

It is at least as likely as not (a 50%/50% probability) that the [V]eteran's current Right Hip Condition is secondary to, related to, and/or aggravated by his service-connected Left Knee, Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome and Right Knee, Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome with associated compensatory posture and movement with biomechanical and kinematic changes.

Dr. C.M.B. further stated that the Veteran "has symptomology consistent with the regulatory standard for Right Hip Condition," based on the Veteran's description of his right hip condition:

My service-connected knees cause me to walk unevenly and stand unevenly and lean to one side. My symptoms for my right hip consist of pain, weakness, and muscle fatigue. Activities such as using stairs, high- impact activity, prolonged standing, prolonged walking, prolonged sitting, crossing my legs, running/jogging, squatting, jumping, quick side to side movements, and carrying heavy objects exacerbate the pain in my right hip, so I try to limit them. I have also found yard work, playing with my pets, long car rides, sitting through a movie, sports, and house chores that require prolonged standing much harder to do without increasing the pain in my right hip. I take medication to help ease my symptoms--Naproxen and Tylenol. I use the following non-medication remedies to ease my hip pain: ice, heat, stretching, and simply staying off my feet. I also switch my weight from side to side when standing still to help with my pain. I require knee braces for my knees to help me walk.

Dr. C.M.B. opined that

[d]ue to the severity of his service connected lower extremity pathology and associated pain, [the Veteran] developed an altered center of gravity and antalgic gait pattern with limping that the medical literature associates with secondary biomechanical changes that cause abnormal kinematics to occur within both of the lower extremity joints, and per the below medical literature, hastened the development and progression of his Right Hip Condition.

In support of this finding, Dr. C.M.B. cited and summarized medical literature explaining the pathophysiology of the relationship between the Veteran's bilateral knee condition and his hip condition. Dr. C.M.B. stated that the positive nexus opinion was based on review of the Veteran's service and/or civilian medical records, his "Current
]ue to the severity of his service connected lower extremity pathology and associated pain, [the Veteran] developed an altered center of gravity and antalgic gait pattern with limping that the medical literature associates with secondary biomechanical changes that cause abnormal kinematics to occur within both of the lower extremity joints, and per the below medical literature, hastened the development and progression of his Right Hip Condition.

In support of this finding, Dr. C.M.B. cited and summarized medical literature explaining the pathophysiology of the relationship between the Veteran's bilateral knee condition and his hip condition. Dr. C.M.B. stated that the positive nexus opinion was based on review of the Veteran's service and/or civilian medical records, his "Current Right Hip Condition which chronologically developed after he began compensating for the service-connected [bilateral knee conditions]," the medical literature cited in support, and the Veteran's lay statement which Dr. C.M.B. noted to be credible.

As an initial determination, the Board finds that the Veteran has a current right hip disability for the following reasons.

The record contains no diagnosed right hip condition. However, even in the absence of a diagnosis, pain may constitute a current disability where it impairs the Veteran's earning capacity. See Saunders v. Wilkie, 886 F.3d 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (holding that the term disability "refers to the functional impairment of earning capacity, not the underlying cause of said disability").

Lay testimony may in certain circumstances provide sufficient support for a claim of entitlement to service connection. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 307 (2007); see also Washington v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 191, 195 (2007) (recognizing that a layperson is competent to relate observable symptoms of a disability). However, while lay testimony is competent to establish the presence of observable symptomatology, it is generally not competent to establish facts which require specialized medical knowledge or expertise. See Clemons v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 1, 4-5 (2009) (noting that while "an appellant who has no special medical expertise may testify as to the symptoms he can observe, he generally is not competent to provide a diagnosis that requires the application of medical expertise to the facts presented").

The Veteran is competent to report his experience of right hip pain. See Charles v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 370, 374 (2002). Here, the Veteran described that he experiences right hip "pain, weakness, and muscle fatigue," and his pain is exacerbated by "[a]ctivities such as using stairs, high- impact activity, prolonged standing, prolonged walking, prolonged sitting, crossing my legs, running/jogging, squatting, jumping, quick side to side movements, and carrying heavy objects." See November 2022 Statement. He stated that his right hip pain makes it much harder to do "yard work, playing with my pets, long car rides, sitting through a movie, sports, and house chores that require prolonged standing," and he takes over-the-counter pain medication for his right hip pain, as well as "ice, heat, stretching, and simply staying off my feet." Id. Dr. C.M.B. specifically found the Veteran's November 2022 statement describing his right hip pain to be credible. The Veteran also reported during his May 2023 VA examination that he experiences chronic right hip pain at a level of 8 out of 10, for which he takes naproxen daily for pain relief; he also described "pain in the hip when walking or standing for extended periods." The VA examiner noted that the Veteran's right hip pain would limit his range of motion with repeated use over time.

The Board finds no reason to doubt his credibility in this matter. The Veteran's limited tolerance for prolonged standing, sitting, and walking, as well as limited ability to do physical activity, clearly impairs his earning capacity. As the Veteran has competently and credibly reported that he experiences right hip pain that results in functional impairment, this is positive and probative evidence in favor of service connection.

Therefore, the Board finds that the Veteran's right hip pain constitutes a disability for VA purposes under Saunders.

It having been determined that the Veteran has a current right hip disability, the remaining question is whether his current disability results from his service-connected knee conditions.

The record contains three medical opinions addressing whether the Veteran has a right hip condition secondary to his service-connected knee conditions. The March 2021 VA negative nexus opinion is based on there being "no medical records found supporting such nexus." Because medical evidence has subsequently been added supporting a nexus-namely, the April 2022 private medical opinion-the Board finds that the March 2021 VA opinion is of reduced probative weight
this is positive and probative evidence in favor of service connection.

Therefore, the Board finds that the Veteran's right hip pain constitutes a disability for VA purposes under Saunders.

It having been determined that the Veteran has a current right hip disability, the remaining question is whether his current disability results from his service-connected knee conditions.

The March 2023 VA negative nexus opinion is based on a lack of a diagnosed right hip condition. However, as discussed above, the Board herein has found that the Veteran has a current right hip disability due to functional impairment of earning capacity. Therefore, Board also affords the March 2023 opinion little probative weight.

The April 2022 private opinion discusses the Veteran's competent and credible reports of his experience of right hip pain, and explains the pathophysiology of causation whereby his service-connected knee conditions have led to his current right hip condition. Therefore, the Board finds that the April 2022 opinion is of high probative value.

Based on the foregoing, the Board finds that the competent and credible evidence persuasively weighs in favor of finding that the Veteran's unspecified right hip disorder is the result of his service-connected knee conditions. His appeal is granted.

2. Entitlement to service connection for chronic rhinitis, allergic or non-allergic, is granted.

The Veteran contends that he has chronic rhinitis that began during his active-duty service. Specifically, he asserts that he began having symptoms of rhinitis during service after his Gulf War deployment. See May 2024 VA examination.

The Board notes that the Veteran was granted service connection for allergic rhinitis in a September 2025 AOJ decision; however, the effective date for that grant of service connection only goes back to the date of an August 2025 supplemental claim. Because the rhinitis claim before the Board stems from an April 2024 claim, the issue is not rendered moot by the subsequent grant of service connection.

In the December 2024 decision on appeal, the AOJ denied the Veteran's service-connection claim for rhinitis, allergic or non-allergic, finding that the medical evidence supports the conclusion that a persistent disability was not present in service and that there was no continuity of symptoms from service to the present; and finding that the Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of chronic rhinitis, allergic or non-allergic. The AOJ favorably found that participation in a toxic exposure risk activity (TERA) is conceded based on the Veteran's service in Southwest Asia from September 1, 1990 to April 2, 1991, and in Iraq from March 30, 2003 to December 1, 2003; that the claimed condition of rhinitis is one that has been presumptively linked to exposure to particulate matter pollution if manifested any time after date of separation; and that the Veteran was exposed to particulate matter pollution during his service in Southwest Asia and Iraq.

In the subsequent September 2025 rating decision which granted service connection for allergic rhinitis (claimed as chronic sinusitis), the AOJ made an implicit favorable finding that the Veteran has a current chronic rhinitis condition. Therefore, the Therefore, the Board finds that the only issue to be determined is whether the Veteran had a rhinitis condition during the period on appeal, which ended as of the date of the December 2024 rating decision on appeal.

During the Veteran's February 1988 enlistment medical examination, he was not noted to have rhinitis. The Veteran's service treatment records include a December 1995 appointment when the Veteran was seen with complaints of "coughing for 2-3 months. Nose runs continuously. Feels it is not a normal cold. Congestion/cough worse at night - inability - lungs feel like they are wheezing." The Veteran was found to have a persistent cough, post-nasal drip, and "not good" lung sounds with wheezing.

During a September 2021 VA primary care appointment, the review of symptoms noted that the Veteran was experiencing nasal discharge. During an October 2021 VA airborne hazard/burn pit registry initial evaluation, the Veteran reported that his symptoms include chronic sinus congestion and runny nose/post-nasal drip. The Veteran also stated that "he feels he has some sinus issue and nasal congestion with runny nose for since he has been in military and even now but however he has no reported at the VA providers."

In a May
estion/cough worse at night - inability - lungs feel like they are wheezing." The Veteran was found to have a persistent cough, post-nasal drip, and "not good" lung sounds with wheezing.

In a May 2024 VA examination for the Veteran's claimed rhinitis, the VA examiner found that the Veteran did not have any diagnosis of rhinitis. The medical history was noted to be:

ONSET/ CURRENT SYMPTOMS: VETERAN REPORTS THE SAME SYMPTOMS FOR CLAIMED RHINITIS/ALLERGIES AND SINUSITIS. HE STATES ONSET OF SYMPTOMS ( RUNNY NOSE, WATERY & ACHING EYES, HEADACHES, AND HAVING TO CLEAR HIS THROAT) AFTER GULF WAR. HE STATES HE REPORTED HIS SYMPTOMS ON HIS GULF WAR EXAM IN 1999. HE STATES HIS SYMPTOMS GOT WORSE WHEN HE GOT TO FT. HOOD IN 2002. HE STAES HE CONTINUS TO HAVE DAILY SYMPTOMS- RUNNY NOSE, WATERY & ACHING EYES, AND HAVING TO CLEAR HIS THROAT. HE ALSO REPORTS GETTING HEADACHES EVERY OTEHR DAY. HE STATES HE WILL TAKE BC POWDER OR GOOD Y POWDER FOR HIS HEADACHES AND TAKES OT ALLERGY PILLS( HAS TO ASK PHARMACY FOR PILLS,NOT ON SHELVES).

MEDICAL EVALUATION: STR'S DOCUMENT EVALUATION AND TREATMENT FOR REPORTED COUGH AND RUNNY NOSE X 2 MONTHS ON 11 DEC 1995. VETERAN WAS TREATED FOR RHINITIS( ACUTE), R/O ALLERGY. VETERAN MARKED YES TO SINUSITIS AND WAS NOTED TO HAVE SINUS TENDERNESS ON HIS COMPREHENESIVE CLINICAL EVALUATION PROGRAM ( CCEP) PHYSICAL EXAM ON 17 FEB 1999, HIS SINUS XRAY DID NOT SHOW ANY EVIDENCE OF SINUSITIS. HE WAS NOT TREATED FOR ACUTE OR CHRONIC SINUSITIS.

The examiner further remarked:

DIAGNOSIS: NO DIAGNOSIS FOUND. STR'S DOCUMENT EVALUATION AND TREATMENT FOR REPORTED COUGH AND RUNNY NOSE X 2 MONTHS ON 11 DEC 1995. VETERAN WAS TREATED FOR RHINITIS( ACUTE), R/O ALLERGY. HIS STR'S ARE OTHERWISE SILENT, THERE IS NO OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE OF A CONTINUOUS CHRONIC DISABILING CONDITION REQUIRING ONGOING CARE DURING THE REMAINING 13 YEARS OF ACTIVE DUTY. REVIEW OF COMPREHENESIVE CLINICAL EVALUATION PROGRAM ( CCEP) PHYSICAL EXAM ON 17 FEB 1999, 5YR WOC PHYSICAL ( 22 JAN 2001) AND RETIREMENT PHYSICAL ( 28 MAY 2008) ARE ALL NEGATIVE FOR ANY DIAGNOSES OF RHINITIS/ALLERGIC RHINITIS, VETERAN MARKED NO TO HAY FEVER OR ALLERGIC RHINITIS, HIS NOSE EXAM WAS NORMAL. POST SEPARATION MEDICAL RECORDS ARE SILENT, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THIS CONDITION WAS EVER EVALUATED, TREATED, OR DIAGNOSED. THERE IS NOT ENOUGH OBJECTIVE MEDICAL RECORD EVIDENCE, TO INCLUDE THE PHYSICAL EXAM, TO RENDER A CHRONIC DIAGNOSIS EVIDENCE DOES NOT SUPPORT FINDING OF A CURRENT OR CHRONIC CONDITION OR DIAGNOSIS RELATED TO THIS CLAIMED CONDITION

Thus, the May 2024 VA examiner noted the Veteran's report that he began experiencing rhinitis symptoms during service after his Gulf War deployment and that "he continues to have daily symptoms," but nevertheless found that the Veteran did not have any diagnosis of rhinitis.

The May 2024 VA examiner failed to address the Veteran's competent reports of continued symptoms during and since service. The examiner failed to explain why a diagnosis could not be made based on the Veteran's reported
MEDICAL RECORD EVIDENCE, TO INCLUDE THE PHYSICAL EXAM, TO RENDER A CHRONIC DIAGNOSIS EVIDENCE DOES NOT SUPPORT FINDING OF A CURRENT OR CHRONIC CONDITION OR DIAGNOSIS RELATED TO THIS CLAIMED CONDITION

The May 2024 VA examiner failed to address the Veteran's competent reports of continued symptoms during and since service. The examiner failed to explain why a diagnosis could not be made based on the Veteran's reported symptoms which he is competent to make. Additionally, the VA examiner improperly and inaccurately relied on the absence of evidence of continued treatment for rhinitis symptoms in the Veteran's service treatment records. See Dalton v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 23, 43-44 (2007).

Because of the above deficiencies, the Board does not find the May 2024 VA examination to be probative regarding the issue of whether the Veteran suffered from chronic rhinitis at that time, particularly in light of the fact that the AOJ found that the Veteran did have allergic rhinitis with an effective date of little over a year afterwards.

The Board further notes that the Veteran's in-service treatment for rhinitis was for similar symptoms as the Veteran reported during his May 2024 examination, namely persistent cough/having to clear his throat and runny nose.

(Continued on the next page)

Based on the Veteran's VA treatment records showing that he was experiencing rhinitis symptoms in September and October 2021, and his competent reports of symptoms of rhinitis during the May 2024 VA examination, the Board finds that the evidence is at least in approximate balance as to whether the Veteran had a current chronic rhinitis disability during the period on appeal. Resolving any reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, his appeal is granted.

S. Kim

Acting Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board R. West

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.

Analyze in VA Law Explorer