Citation Nr: 1305607 Decision Date: 02/15/13 Archive Date: 02/21/13 DOCKET NO. 07-17 882 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Denver, Colorado THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral hip disability. REPRESENTATION Veteran represented by: Disabled American Veterans ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD S. Coyle, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran, who is the appellant, served on active duty from May 2001 to May 2005. This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal of a rating decision in May 2005 of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In October 2010, the Board remanded the claim for further development. The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center in Washington, DC. REMAND Pursuant to the Board's remand, the Veteran was afforded a VA examination in December 2010. The VA examiner's impression was bilateral hip abductor myofasciitis and tendinitis and no evidence of intrinsic hip joint pain, which was less likely than not related to the Veteran's service. The VA examiner's rationale in part was a lack of evidence of treatment of symptoms in service. On the basis of the history provided by the Veteran, the Board is unable to rely on this rationale to decide the claim. Also, the Veteran asserts that his bilateral hip disability is secondary to his service-connected disability of the lumbar spine disability. As the evidence of record is insufficient to decide the claim under the applicable theories of service connection, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Ensure compliance with the duty to notify under the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000 (VCAA) on the claim of secondary service connection for a bilateral hip disability. 2. Obtain VA records since February 2010. 3. Afford the Veteran a VA examination by medical professional, who has not previously examined the Veteran, to determine: Whether it is more likely than not (probability greater than 50 percent), at least as likely as not (probability of 50 percent), or less likely than not (probability less than 50 percent), that the current findings of bilateral hip abductor myofasciitis and tendinitis (VA examination in December 2010) or other hip pathology, if shown, is: i). A progression of the hip pain, following airborne training, including numerous training and operational jumps, while the Veteran was on active duty, or the development of new and separate condition; in the alternatively, ii). A manifestation of the service-connected disability of the lumbar spine, namely, disc pathology; or, iii). Caused by or aggravated by the service-connected disability of the lumbar spine or the right knee patellar tendinitis, or both ? The term "aggravation" means a permanent increase in severity, that is, an irreversible worsening of the hip disability as a result of the service-connected disability of the lumbar spine or of the right knee or both beyond the natural clinical course of the hip disability as contrasted to a temporary worsening of symptoms. In formulating an opinion, the VA examiner is asked to consider these facts: While on active duty, on a pre-discharge VA examination in February 2005, the Veteran complained of constant hip pain, but no pathology was found. On VA examination for evaluation of the disability of the lumbar spine in May 2007, the Veteran complained of hip pain. On VA examination in August 2008, the Veteran stated that hip pain began after his first airborne jump in service. The pertinent finding was hip flexor tendinitis due to tightness of the hip flexors. On VA examination in December 2010, the Veteran stated that he did over 130 parachute jumps in service, and that the hip pain came on gradually without a specific incident or injury and that he did not seek treatment for hip pain. The VA examiner is also asked to consider that the Board has determined that the Veteran's complaint of hip pain in service is competent and credible evidence, even though there is a lack of contemporaneous medical evidence. If, after a review of the record, an opinion cannot be provided without resort to speculation, please clarify whether causation or aggravation cannot be determined because there are several potential etiologies, please identify the other potential etiologies, and that an opinion on causation or aggravation is beyond what may be reasonably concluded based on the evidence of record and current medical knowledge. The Veteran's file must be made available to the VA examiner for review. 4. After the above development is completed adjudicate the claim, including secondary service connection. If the benefit sought is denied, furnish the Veteran and his representative a supplemental statement of the case and return the case to the Board. The Veteran has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). The case must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board or by the Court for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2012). _________________________________________________ George E. Guido Jr. Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board is appealable to the Court. This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2012).