Citation Nr: 18141356 Decision Date: 10/11/18 Archive Date: 10/10/18 DOCKET NO. 15-04 004 DATE: October 11, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral hip disorder, diagnosed as osteoarthritis, is granted. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran has a bilateral hip disorder, diagnosed as osteoarthritis, that is related to his military service. CONCLUSION OF LAW A bilateral hip disorder, diagnosed as osteoarthritis, was incurred in active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5103, 5103A, 5107 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.159, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309 (2017). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from November 1983 to January 2002. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2012 rating decision. A hearing was held before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in July 2018. A transcript of the hearing is of record. Law and Analysis Service connection may be established for disability resulting from personal injury suffered or disease contracted in line of duty in the active military, naval, or air service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131. That an injury or disease occurred in service is not enough; there must be chronic disability resulting from that injury or disease. If there is no showing of a resulting chronic condition during service, then a showing of continuity of symptomatology after service is required to support a finding of chronicity. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b). Service connection may also be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). For the showing of chronic disease in service, there is required a combination of manifestations sufficient to identify the disease entity, and sufficient observation to establish chronicity at the time. As arthritis is considered to be a chronic disease for VA compensation purposes, if chronicity in service is not established, a showing of continuity of symptoms after discharge may support the claim. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303(b), 3.309; Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2013). In addition, for veterans who have served 90 days or more of active service during a war period or after December 31, 1946, certain chronic disabilities, including arthritis, are presumed to have been incurred in service if they manifested to a degree of 10 percent or more within one year from the date of separation from service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1112, 1113, 1137; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307, 3.309. In considering the evidence of record under the laws and regulations as set forth above, the Board concludes that the Veteran is entitled to service connection for a bilateral hip disorder. The Veteran’s service treatment records are negative for any complaints, diagnosis or treatment of a hip disorder or injury. There is also no objective x-ray evidence of arthritis within one year after his separation from service. The Veteran was subsequently diagnosed with severe osteoarthritis in both hips and underwent a bilateral total hip arthroplasty. He has claimed that his current bilateral hip disorder is related to his military duties. His service personnel records indicate that he served as a construction electrician. During the July 2018 hearing, the Veteran testified that he climbed utility poles during the first ten years of service. He stated that he strapped himself onto the pole with a D-ring belt resting on his hips. He worked on the utility poles for hours at a time. See also January 2015 VA Form 9 (stating that he had a very physical job that involved climbing utility poles and ladders with a heavy-duty belt putting a strain on his hips). The Veteran has denied having any post-service injury to his hips. He also testified at the July 2018 hearing that he experienced aches and pains in service, but did not seek medical treatment because he did not understand the nature of his condition and because he did want to be known for going to sick call. See also April 2013 notice of disagreement (stating that he had hip pain during service, but viewed it as part of his job). The Veteran indicated that his condition became progressively worse over the years and that he began limping. The Board finds the Veteran’s testimony and lay statements regarding the onset and continuity of his symptoms to be credible. There is no reason to doubt the credibility of his statements other than a lack of contemporaneous evidence. Buchanan v. Nicholson, 451 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2006) In addition, an orthopedic surgeon, Dr. A.M. (initials used to protect privacy), diagnosed the Veteran with severe osteoarthritis in September 2013. He stated, “It sounds as though he had a physical job when he was in the Navy which did involve a lot of climbing as well as use of a heavy belt. I think it is very probable that these activities did contribute to/accelerate the degenerative process involving his hips bilaterally.” See Coburn v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 427, 432 (2006) (reliance on a Veteran’s statement renders a medical report incredible only if the Board rejects the statements of the Veteran). The Board notes that a May 2012 VA examiner opined that it is less likely than not that the Veteran’s left hip pain is related to his service-connected right knee disability, explaining that the medical evidence does not support the degeneration of contralateral joints beyond normal progression relative to a degenerative or injured joint. In a July 2012 addendum opinion, the VA examiner stated that there is no nexus to the Veteran’s military service. However, she did not provide any rationale for that conclusion. Indeed, she did not address the Veteran’s lay statements regarding the onset of the disorder and continuity of symptomatology. Nor did the examiner discuss his military duties. As such, her opinion has very limited probative value regarding direct service connection. Based on the foregoing, the Board will resolve reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 53 (1990). Accordingly, service connection for a bilateral hip disorder is warranted. J.W. ZISSIMOS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD D.S. Chilcote, Associate Counsel