HIP IMPAIRMENT OF

Summary

The Veteran, an Army Veteran who served from September 1998 to September 2002, March 2003 to March 2004, August 2005 to August 2006, and November 2015 to November 2016, including service in Southwest Asia and earning the Combat Action Badge in Iraq, appeals the denial of service connection for a left hip disability. The Veteran testified that his left hip began hurting during service due to his work posture and that a back injury sustained in Iraq later caused his left hip problems. However, multiple VA hip examinations in August 2018 and August 2024, along with VA and private treatment records, did not establish a diagnosis of left hip disability, although subjective left hip pain was noted. The Board acknowledged that symptoms alone can constitute a disability if they impair earning capacity, but the Veteran provided no further details to support such an impairment. In the absence of a current diagnosed disability or evidence of functional impairment of earning capacity, the Board found that service connection could not be established. The evidence weighed against the claim, rendering the benefit-of-the-doubt doctrine inapplicable. Service connection for the left hip disability was denied.

Rationale

No current diagnosis of left hip disability found in VA or private treatment records.; Subjective left hip pain reported by Veteran, but no evidence of functional impairment of earning capacity.; Evidence weighs against the claim, making benefit-of-the-doubt rule inapplicable.

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: 26003815
Decision Date: 03/25/26	Archive Date: 03/25/26

DOCKET NO. 19-36 192A
DATE:  March 25, 2026

ORDER

Entitlement to service connection for a left hip disability is denied.

FINDING OF FACT

The evidence of record persuasively weighs against finding that the Veteran has had left hip diagnosis at any time during or approximate to the pendency of the claim.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for service connection of left hip disability have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.310.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

The Veteran served honorably on active duty in the United States Army from September 1998 to September 2002, from March 2003 to March 2004, from August 2005 to August 2006, and from November 2015 to November 2016. The Veteran had service in Southwest Asia and was awarded the Combat Action Badge following service in Iraq. 

This case comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2018 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).

The Veteran testified at a hearing before a Veterans Law Judge in September 2022. A transcript of the hearing has been associated with the claims file. The Veteran was told that the Veterans Law Judge who conducted the September 2022 Board hearing is no longer available to participate in his appeal. He was informed that he has the right to request another optional Board hearing. The Veteran did not respond within 30 days of the date of the letter, and the Board will proceed with appellate disposition in this matter.

In August 2023, the Board remanded the Veteran's claim for additional development. The claim has since been returned to the Board for further appellate action. The Board is satisfied there was substantial compliance with its remand orders. See Dyment v. West, 13 Vet. App. 141, 146-47; Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271. 

Following the Board's August 2023 remand and subsequent development, the RO granted service connection for right hip disability, characterized as limitation of extension, limitation of abduction, and limitation of flexion, effective the February 2018 date of claim. As this decision represents a full grant of the matter previously on appeal, it is no longer before the Board.

Service Connection

Service connection will be granted if it is shown that the Veteran suffers from a disability resulting from personal injury suffered or disease contracted in the line of duty, or for aggravation during active service of a preexisting injury or disease. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Disorders diagnosed after discharge will still be service connected if all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d).

Establishing service connection generally requires competent evidence of three things: (1) a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship, i.e., a nexus, between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the current disability. Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1362, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a).

Service connection is also warranted for disability which is 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 disease or injury that is proximately due to or the result of a service-connected disease or injury, and not due to the natural progress of the nonservice-connected disease. 38 C.F.R. § 3.310(b).

Pertinent to a claim for service connection, such a determination requires a finding of current disability that is related to an injury or disease in service. Brammer v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 223, 225 (1992). In McClain v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 319, 321 (2007), the Court held that the requirement of the existence of a current disability is satisfied when a Veteran has a disability at the time he or she files a claim for service connection or during the pendency of that claim, even if the disability resolves prior to adjud
 due to the natural progress of the nonservice-connected disease. 38 C.F.R. § 3.310(b).

Pertinent to a claim for service connection, such a determination requires a finding of current disability that is related to an injury or disease in service. Brammer v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 223, 225 (1992). In McClain v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 319, 321 (2007), the Court held that the requirement of the existence of a current disability is satisfied when a Veteran has a disability at the time he or she files a claim for service connection or during the pendency of that claim, even if the disability resolves prior to adjudication of the claim. However, in Romanowsky v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 289 (2013), the Court held that when the record contains a recent diagnosis of disability prior to a Veteran filing a claim for benefits based on that disability, the report of diagnosis is relevant evidence that the Board must address in determining whether a current disability existed at the time the claim was filed or during its pendency. 

Competent medical evidence is evidence provided by a person who is qualified through education, training, or experience to offer medical diagnoses, statements, or opinions. Competent medical evidence may also include statements conveying sound medical principles found in medical treatises. It also includes statements contained in authoritative writings, such as medical and scientific articles and research reports or analyses. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(a)(1). 

Competent lay evidence is any evidence not requiring that the proponent have specialized education, training, or experience. Lay evidence is competent if it is provided by a person who has knowledge of facts or circumstances and conveys matters that can be observed and described by a lay person. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(a)(2). This may include some medical matters, such as describing symptoms or relating a contemporaneous medical diagnosis. Jandreau, 492 F.3d 1372.

In determining whether service connection is warranted for a disability, VA is responsible for determining whether the evidence supports the claim or is "nearly equal" or in approximate balance, with the Veteran prevailing in either event, or whether most of the evidence is against the claim, in which case the claim is denied. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; Lynch v. McDonough, 21 F.4th 776.

1. Entitlement service connection for a left hip disability

The Veteran contends that he has a left hip disability and that it is due to service or is secondary to his service-connected back disability.

At the September 2022 Board hearing, the Veteran testified that his hips started hurting while stationed at Guantanamo because of the type of work he did. He was seated at a computer, hunched over, for 12-hour night shifts. The Veteran also asserted that the back injury he sustained while station in Iraq caused his later hip problems while in Guantanamo. 

In August 2018, and August 2024 VA hip examinations, examiners diagnosed right hip disability but not left hip disability. VA examiner opinions in September 2018, and August 2024 determined that, while the Veteran experienced subjective symptoms of left hip pain, the Veteran did not have a diagnosis of left hip disability. Further, despite treatment for bilateral hip pain, VA and private treatment records do not contain a diagnosis of left hip disability.

As a lay person, the Veteran is competent to report on that which he has personal knowledge. See Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 469 (1994). In addition, the Board acknowledges that sometimes symptoms, even without an underlying diagnosis, can still constitute a current disability, for VA compensation purposes, if such symptoms reach the level of a functional impairment of earning capacity. See Saunders, 886 F.3d at 1367-68. The Veteran has noted left hip pain and difficulties with standing, squatting, and other movements. However, he has not provided any additional details, nor do the examinations of record reflect, indicating that his left hip pain reaches the level of functional impairment of earning capacity during the pendency of the appeal.

In the absence of a current disability, service connection cannot be established. See Holton, 557 F.3d at 1366 (holding that entitlement to service connection requires, among other things, evidence of a current disability); see also Degmetich v. Brown, 104 F.3d 1328, 1332 (1997) (upholding VA's interpretation of sections 1110 and 1131 of the statute as requiring the existence of a present disability for VA compensation purposes). Accordingly, discussion of remaining criteria for service connection, including discussion of a relationship to service or to service-connected
 reflect, indicating that his left hip pain reaches the level of functional impairment of earning capacity during the pendency of the appeal.

In the absence of a current disability, service connection cannot be established. See Holton, 557 F.3d at 1366 (holding that entitlement to service connection requires, among other things, evidence of a current disability); see also Degmetich v. Brown, 104 F.3d 1328, 1332 (1997) (upholding VA's interpretation of sections 1110 and 1131 of the statute as requiring the existence of a present disability for VA compensation purposes). Accordingly, discussion of remaining criteria for service connection, including discussion of a relationship to service or to service-connected disability, is not warranted.

As the evidence weighs against the claims the benefit-of-the-doubt rule does not apply. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b). 

 

G. E. Wilkerson

Acting Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	J. Black

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.