DEGENERATIVE ARTHRITIS OF THE SPINE (SPONDYLOSIS)

Summary

The veteran, who served from September 1963 to September 1966, appeals the denial of service connection for a low back disability and a bilateral hip disability. The veteran filed a claim for these conditions in November 2025. The Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office (RO) denied these claims in February 2026, finding current disabilities for low back pain and right hip pain, but no evidence of in-service incurrence or aggravation. The veteran appealed this decision via the Direct Review docket. The Board of Veterans' Appeals reviewed the evidence of record at the time of the RO's decision. The veteran's service treatment records, including his separation examination, did not indicate any complaints, diagnosis, or treatment for his back or hips. While later VA treatment records from 2003 onwards showed diagnoses of bilateral avascular necrosis and osteoarthritis, with hip replacements in 2009 and 2019, these records did not indicate an in-service event or continuous symptomatology since service. The Board found no probative evidence linking the back or hip disabilities to service, noting the absence of lay statements supporting a service connection and the significant delay between service and diagnosis (37-52 years). The Board also found no evidence of chronic conditions manifesting within the presumptive period. Although no VA examination was obtained, the Board found none was required due to the lack of any evidence suggesting a link to service, thus denying the duty to assist. Consequently, service connection for both the low back and bilateral hip disabilities was denied.

Rationale

No probative evidence relating back disability to service; No lay statements supporting service connection; Evidence weighs against entitlement

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: A26039988
Decision Date: 04/29/26	Archive Date: 04/29/26

DOCKET NO. 260317-639100
DATE: April 29, 2026

ORDER

Entitlement to service connection for a low back disability is denied. 

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

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. The evidence of record persuasively weighs against finding that a back disability began during active service, manifested within one year of discharge from service, or is otherwise related to an in-service injury or disease.

2. The evidence of record persuasively weighs against finding that a bilateral hip disability began during active service, manifested within one year of discharge from service, or is otherwise related to an in-service injury or disease.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The criteria to establish service connection for a low back disability have not been met.  38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309.

2. The criteria to establish service connection for a bilateral hip disability have not been met.  38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

The Veteran served on active duty from September 1963 to September 1966.

These matters come before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2026 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).

By way of background, the Veteran filed for entitlement to service connection for a back injury and bilateral hip condition in a November 2025 VA Form 21-526EZ.  The RO denied his claims in the February 2026 rating decision.

In the March 2026 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 February 2026 agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) decision on appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.301. Any evidence submitted after the AOJ decision on appeal cannot be considered by the Board. 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 claims, considering the new evidence in addition to the evidence previously considered. Id. Specific instructions for filing a Supplemental Claim are included with this decision.  

The Board notes that even though the period to change dockets per 38 C.F.R. § 20.202(c)(2) has not elapsed, a docket switch waiver letter (see Williams v. McDonough, 37 Vet. App. 305 (2024) is not necessary.  This appeal has been advanced on the docket.  The Board is obligated to address this claim in a timely manner and finds no prejudice to the Veteran in deciding the appeal without a Williams waiver.

Service connection

Service connection on a direct basis may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 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. See Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2009).

Certain chronic diseases such as arthritis will be presumed related to service, absent an intercurrent cause, if they were shown as chronic in service; or, if they manifested to a compensable degree within a presumptive period following separation from service; or, if they were noted in service (or within an applicable presumptive period) with continuity of symptomatology since service that is attributable to the chronic disease.  38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1112, 1113, 1137; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.307, 3.309; Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331, 1338 (Fed. Cir. 
 diseases such as arthritis will be presumed related to service, absent an intercurrent cause, if they were shown as chronic in service; or, if they manifested to a compensable degree within a presumptive period following separation from service; or, if they were noted in service (or within an applicable presumptive period) with continuity of symptomatology since service that is attributable to the chronic disease.  38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1112, 1113, 1137; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.307, 3.309; Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331, 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2013).

In McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006), the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) discussed the steps to be taken in determining whether a VA examination is necessary prior to final adjudication of a claim. In disability compensation claims, VA must provide a VA medical examination when there is (1) competent evidence of a current disability or persistent or recurrent symptoms of a disability, (2) evidence establishing that an event, injury, or disease occurred in service, or establishing certain diseases manifesting during an applicable presumptive period for which the appellant qualifies, and (3) an indication that the disability or persistent or recurrent symptoms of a disability may be associated with the appellant's service or with another service-connected disability, but (4) there is insufficient competent medical evidence on file for VA to make a decision on the claim.  

When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding the merits of an issue, the benefit of the doubt shall be given to the Veteran.  38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102.  When the evidence persuasively favors one side or the other, the benefit-of-the-doubt rule does not apply.  See Lynch v. McDonough, 21 F.4th 776 (Fed. Cir. 2021).

1. Entitlement to service connection for a low back disability.

2. Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral hip disability.

The Veteran submitted a VA Form 21-526EZ in November 2025 and sought entitlement to service connection for a back injury and bilateral hip condition.  The Veteran did not provide a contention regarding a theory of entitlement to service connection for his claimed disabilities. 

The RO found the Veteran had a current disability, specifically that his medical records reflected low back pain and right hip pain.  See Rating Decision - Narrative (receipt date February 20, 2026).   These are favorable findings and binding on the Board absent clear and unmistakable error. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.104(c).

The Veteran's service treatment records, to include his July 1966 separation examination, do not indicate complaints, diagnosis, or treatment for his back or hips.

VA medical records were added to the file in December 2025, January 2026, and April 2026.  To the extent that some of the VA treatment records were created prior to the date of the February 2026 rating decision, the Board has considered such evidence, as VA had constructive notice of any medical records generated prior to the date of the April 2026 rating decision. These records reflect he presented to the orthopedic clinic for the first time in August 2003 with a complaint of left hip pain.  The Veteran reported his symptoms began in 1987 and endorsed no injury to his hip.  He denied low back pain.  The Veteran's treatment records show multiple diagnoses for his hips, including bilateral avascular necrosis and osteoarthritis.  The Veteran was diagnosed with left hip osteonecrosis/osteoarthritis in 2003 and right hip osteoarthritis in 2018.  The Veteran subsequently had a left hip replacement in July 2009 and a right hip replacement in February 2019. 

The Veteran complained of low back pain and right hip pain in a July 2013 visit.  He reported that he had pain for about a week after helping a friend install an SUV door.  The Veteran had an x-ray of his back, and the radiologist noted moderate degenerative changes of the lumbar spine, and the Veteran had an MRI of his lumbar spine in September 2013.  In a March 2014 entry, the Veteran's rheumatologist remarked that, upon viewing the September 2013 MRI, the Veteran had significant lumbar spine osteoarthritis. 

The Board finds there is no probative evidence relating a back or hip disability to service.  The Veteran has not provided any lay statements regarding why he believes his back and hip disabilities are related to service
 a July 2013 visit.  He reported that he had pain for about a week after helping a friend install an SUV door.  The Veteran had an x-ray of his back, and the radiologist noted moderate degenerative changes of the lumbar spine, and the Veteran had an MRI of his lumbar spine in September 2013.  In a March 2014 entry, the Veteran's rheumatologist remarked that, upon viewing the September 2013 MRI, the Veteran had significant lumbar spine osteoarthritis. 

The Board finds there is no probative evidence relating a back or hip disability to service.  The Veteran has not provided any lay statements regarding why he believes his back and hip disabilities are related to service.   As the evidence is neither evenly balanced nor approximate, the benefit of the doubt doctrine does not apply.  Lynch v. McDonough, 21 F.4th 776 (Fed. Cir. 2021).  Direct service connection is therefore denied.

In addition, there is no evidence that arthritis manifested within one year of separation from active service.  The Veteran left service in 1966.  The first evidence in the record of a diagnosis of arthritis of his left hip is in 2003, approximately 37 years after the Veteran separated from military service.   The first evidence in the record of a diagnosis of arthritis in his back is in 2013, approximately 47 years after the Veteran separated from military service.  The first evidence in the record of a diagnosis of arthritis of his right hip is in 2018, approximately 52 years after the Veteran separated from military service.   As such, presumptive service connection based on a chronic condition is denied.  38 C.F.R. § 3.307, 3.309.

Furthermore, the Board acknowledges that no medical examination has been obtained with respect to either claim but finds that none is required in this case.  The Veteran has current back and hip diagnoses. However, the Veteran has not provided a lay statement explaining why he believes his disabilities are related to service.  The evidence fails to show that the Veteran injured his back or hips in service. Service treatment records do not indicate complaints related to his back or hips. Even assuming, without finding, that there is an in-service event, injury, or disease, the record fails to contain evidence indicating that the Veteran's disabilities may be associated with his service.  The Veteran has not alleged continuous symptoms since service and the record contains no medical evidence suggesting a link.  Though the threshold for this element is "low," McLendon, 79 Vet. App. at 83, the record must contain something other than a "conclusory generalized statement" to establish the element.  Waters v. Shinseki, 601 F.3d 1274, 1278 (Fed. Cir. 2010). Thus, the Board finds that VA's duty to assist in providing a VA examination and/or opinion is not triggered. 

In conclusion, the evidence weighs against entitlement to service connection for a back or hip disability, and the claims are therefore denied.

 

 

Rebecca N. Poulson

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Houman, Kelsey J.

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.