SHOULDER IMPAIRMENT OF

Summary

The veteran, who served in the Army from July 1971 to May 1973, appeals the denial of service connection for a right shoulder strain. The Board found that the first element for direct service connection, a current disability, was met due to a favorable finding from the August 2025 rating decision. However, the Board found the second and third elements lacking. Service treatment records were absent any complaints, treatment, or diagnosis of a right shoulder disorder. While the veteran claimed an in-service injury during a helicopter repelling exercise and attributed his current pain to his duties as an artillery crewman, the Board noted inconsistencies in his reporting. He did not report shoulder pain in a December 2010 application, despite reporting other issues, and his wife's testimony was found to be contradicted by recent private treatment records from June 2021 for a new shoulder injury. A July 2025 VA medical opinion concluded it was less likely than not that the right shoulder strain was incurred in or caused by service, citing the lack of in-service and post-service treatment, the 2021 injury, and the Veteran's inconsistent reporting. The Board found this opinion persuasive and gave it significant probative value, noting the Veteran's lay opinion was not competent and his credibility was questioned. The evidence was found to persuasively favor denial, not being in approximate balance. Therefore, service connection for the right shoulder strain was denied.

Rationale

Lack of in-service complaints/treatment; Inconsistent post-service reporting of symptoms; Recent injury contradicts testimony; VA opinion found less likely than not related to service

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: A26040727
Decision Date: 04/30/26	Archive Date: 04/30/26

DOCKET NO. 251107-593109
DATE: April 30, 2026

ORDER

Entitlement to service connection for right shoulder strain is denied.

FINDING OF FACT

A chronic right shoulder condition (right shoulder strain) was not demonstrated in service or within a year of service discharge; and, the persuasive balance of the evidence is against the finding that the Veteran's diagnosed right shoulder strain is due to or related to a disease or injury in service.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for service connection for right shoulder strain are not met.  38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303.

?

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

The Veteran served on active duty from July 1971 to May 1973 in the United States Army. 

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2025 Rating Decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) regional office.  The Veteran appealed that decision by filing a VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal, on November 7, 2025.  He elected the hearing docket with a Veterans Law Judge.  Docket number 251107-593109 was assigned to the appeal.

The Veteran withdrew the hearing request on January 8, 2026.  Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the August 2025 Rating Decision, as well as any evidence submitted by the Veteran or his representative within 90 days following receipt of the hearing withdrawal, that is by April 29, 2026.  38 C.F.R. §20.302(b).  Evidence was submitted.

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.

The instant issue was previously before the Board in June 2025 when it was remanded to obtain a VA medical opinion that considered the Veteran's post-service VA and private treatment records.  The examiner was also directed to consider the Veteran's report that his shoulder pain started in service and had continued since that time.  A medical opinion was obtained in July 2025. The July 2025 examiner is shown to have reviewed the medical record in its entirety, considered the lay statements of record, and provided rationale for the opinion.  The opinion is more than adequate.  Consequently, the Board finds that substantial compliance has been established with the prior remand directives.  Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). 

Entitlement to service connection for right shoulder strain.

Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred coincident with or aggravated by service.  38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a).  Establishing direct service connection generally requires competent evidence of: (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.  Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

Service connection for certain chronic diseases, listed at 38 C.F.R. § 3.309 (a) may be established on a presumptive basis if the chronic disease was shown as chronic in service; manifested to a compensable degree within a presumptive period (1 year, in the case of arthritis) after separation; or was noted in service with continuity of symptomatology since service. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303 (b), 3.307, 3.309(a); Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2013).

In determining whether evidence submitted by a claimant is credible, VA may consider internal consistency, facial plausibility, and consistency with other evidence.  See Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498, 
 presumptive basis if the chronic disease was shown as chronic in service; manifested to a compensable degree within a presumptive period (1 year, in the case of arthritis) after separation; or was noted in service with continuity of symptomatology since service. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303 (b), 3.307, 3.309(a); Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2013).

In determining whether evidence submitted by a claimant is credible, VA may consider internal consistency, facial plausibility, and consistency with other evidence.  See Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498, 511 (1995). VA can also consider bias in lay evidence and conflicting statements of a veteran in weighing credibility.  See Buchanan v. Nicholson, 451 F.3d 1331, 1337 (Fed. Cir. 2006).

When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, the benefit of the doubt shall be given to the claimant.  38 U.S.C. § 5107(b).  An approximate balance of the evidence includes but is not limited to equipoise.  Lynch v. McDonough, 21 F.4th 776, 781 (Fed. Cir. 2021).  Evidence is not in "approximate balance" or "nearly equal" when the evidence persuasively favors one side or the other.  Id.

The Veteran contends that his right shoulder condition is due to his active service.  He states he first injured his right shoulder during a training exercise that involved repelling from a helicopter. He reports falling during that exercise and injuring his shoulder.  He indicates that he did not seek medical attention at that time as he wanted to make the Army his career and thought that seeking medical attention would damage his future in the Army  More recently, the Veteran, through his attorney, argues that his shoulder problems are the result of the stresses and strains of being an Army Field Artillery crewman, which required a constant heavy lifting and repetitive use of the arms and shoulders.  

As for post separation treatment, the Veteran reported self-medication with heating pads and over the counter medications, until recently with increased symptomatology he takes prescribed pain medication and has received a Cortisone shot in his shoulder.  He testified in March 2025 that the only injury of the right shoulder that he had experienced was in service.  His wife testified at his Board hearing and corroborated the Veteran's reports as to his history of, and treatment of, his right shoulder disability.  See March 2025 Board Hearing; February 2026 Representative Contentions. 

In the August 2025 rating decision on appeal, the AOJ favorably found that the Veteran has a current disability of right shoulder strain.  See October 2018 VA Shoulder Examination at 17.  The Board is bound by the AOJ's favorable findings.  See 38 C.F.R. § 3.104(c).  The first Shedden element of direct service connection has been met.

Turning to the Veteran's right shoulder strain and with respect to the second element of service connection, service treatment records (STRs) are absent any complaints, treatment, or diagnosis of any right shoulder disorder to include strain.  The Veteran has explained that the absence of recorded complaints/treatment was due to his concern that such would adversely affect his military career.  Such is certainly plausible. 

However, to the extent that he now reports experiencing recurrent right shoulder pain since service, the Board notes the Veteran did not report any right shoulder pain or strain in his December 2010 VA Form 21-526 Application for Compensation. He has provided no explanation as to why he would report problems with his low back and feet but not his right shoulder. Had he been experiencing recurrent right shoulder pain since service, as he had with his back, it certainly stands to reason that he would have reported the same in December 2010. It is also notable that private treatment records from Cone Health dated from June 2009 through May 2017 reference treatment for musculoskeletal issues including low back pain but do not include complaints of, treatment for, or diagnosis of any right shoulder condition.  See June 2018 Private Medica Records.  Moreover, private treatment records received in February 2026 include treatment for a right shoulder injury from a "recent fall" in June 2021. Such treatment contradicts the Veteran's March 2025 Board hearing reports of not experiencing any post-separation injuries to his right shoulder. While there are findings of the Veteran having right shoulder strain in October 2018, his failure to fully acknowledge his post-service medical history, i.e., injuring his shoulder in 2021
 from Cone Health dated from June 2009 through May 2017 reference treatment for musculoskeletal issues including low back pain but do not include complaints of, treatment for, or diagnosis of any right shoulder condition.  See June 2018 Private Medica Records.  Moreover, private treatment records received in February 2026 include treatment for a right shoulder injury from a "recent fall" in June 2021. Such treatment contradicts the Veteran's March 2025 Board hearing reports of not experiencing any post-separation injuries to his right shoulder. While there are findings of the Veteran having right shoulder strain in October 2018, his failure to fully acknowledge his post-service medical history, i.e., injuring his shoulder in 2021, causes the Board to question his ability to provide an accurate medical history.  

A VA medical opinion was obtained in July 2025 to address the Veteran's report of experiencing recurrent right shoulder pain since active service.  The examiner reviewed the record, considered the lay statements of record, and determined that it is less likely than not that the Veteran's right shoulder strain was incurred in or caused by the claimed inservice, injury, event, or illness.  The examiner noted the absence of in-service treatment and post-separation treatment as well as the 2021 shoulder x-ray noting degenerative changes.  The examiner further noted the nature of muscle strain and the Veteran's first reports of shoulder pain more than 40 years after separation.  As the examiner reviewed the claims file and offered clear rationale for the opinions offered, the Board affords the opinions significant probative value.  See Monzingo v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 97, 106 (2012) (noting the fact that the rationale provided by an examiner "did not explicitly lay out the examiner's journey from the facts to a conclusion," did not render the examination inadequate); Acevedo v. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 286, 294 (2012) (finding medical reports must be read as a whole and in the context of the evidence of record).  

Consideration has been given to the Veteran's sincere belief that his current right shoulder strain is due to injuries sustained while inservice.  However, as a lay person, his opinion is not found to be competent.  See Kahana v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 428, 435 (2011).  The cause and etiology of right shoulder strain falls outside the realm of common knowledge of a lay person.  See Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377 n.4 (Fed. Cir. 2007).  The record does not demonstrate that he is qualified to diagnose right shoulder strain and provide an opinion with respect to its etiology.  Moreover, the Board affords more weight to the July 2025 VA opinion.  There is no competent medical opinion to the contrary.  It is also noted that the credibility of the report of experiencing right shoulder pain since service has also been questioned.  

Thus, for the reasons and bases discussed, the evidence for the claims versus the evidence against these claims is not in "approximate" balance (i.e., nearly equal).  Instead, the most probative and, therefore, most persuasive evidence is against these claims.  See Lynch v. McDonough, 999 F.3d 1391 (2021); Ortiz v. Principi, 274 F.3d 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2001).  Service connection for right shoulder strain is denied.

 

 

MICHAEL A. HERMAN

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Scheirich, David B.

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.