Citation Nr: 21042360 Decision Date: 07/12/21 Archive Date: 07/12/21 DOCKET NO. 16-31 400 DATE: July 12, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for a thyroid disorder (claimed as thyromegaly) is denied. FINDING OF FACT The most probative evidence does not support the existence of a current thyroid disorder at any point during the rating period on appeal. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to service connection for a thyroid disorder (claimed as thyromegaly) are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Navy from October 1991 to October 1993, and in the U.S. Marine Corps from February 1995 to August 2000. These matters come before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal of a rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge during a hearing in August 2019. A transcript of the hearing is associated with the claims file. In July 2020, the Board remanded this claim for further development. The agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) was asked to obtain a VA examination to clarify whether there was a current thyroid disorder and whether any such disorder is related to reports of thyromegaly and enlarged thyroid on the military separation examination in July 2000. The Veteran attended a VA examination in January 2021. After reviewing the examination report, the Board finds that it substantially complies with the prior remand directives. As neither the Veteran nor his attorney has raised any other issues and no other issues have been reasonably raised by the record, the Board will proceed with a decision on the merits of this appeal. See Doucette v. Shulkin, 38 Vet. App. 366, 369-70 (2017) (confirming that the Board is not required to address issues unless they are specifically raised by the claimant or reasonably raised by the evidence of record). Legal Criteria Service Connection 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). The existence of a current disability is the cornerstone of a VA compensation claim. See Degmetich v. Brown, 104 F.3d 1328, 1332 (1997) (holding that interpretation of 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110 and 1131 as requiring the existence of a present disability cannot be considered arbitrary). In the absence of proof of a present disability, there can be no valid claim. Brammer v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 223, 225 (1992). The United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) has held that the requirement of a current disability is satisfied when a claimant has a disability at the time a claim for VA disability compensation is filed or during the pendency of that claim. McClain v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 319, 321 (2007) Entitlement to service connection for a thyroid disorder (claimed as thyromegaly) The Board finds that the most probative evidence does not show an active thyroid disorder at any time during the rating period on appeal. Therefore, a current disability is not established, and the claim of service connection must be denied. The Veteran's separation examination documented an enlarged thyroid and thyromegaly in July 2000. Therefore, the questions for the Board are (1) whether there exists a current thyroid disorder and (2) whether there exists a nexus between any such disorder and military service. See Shedden, 381 F.3d at 1167. VA medical records do not show treatment for a thyroid disorder during the appeal period. In fact, numerous VA physical examinations were negative for thyroid problems and thyromegaly, including in 2013, 2014, 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020. The Veteran also submitted private medical records. However, such records do not show an active thyroid disorder during the appeal period. The Veteran underwent a VA examination in January 2021. He reported that he was told that his thyroid is enlarged, but his hormones have always been within normal range. After performing a physical evaluation, the examiner, Dr. J.T., did not diagnose any current thyroid disorder. She found that "there is no objective evidence to diagnose a thyroid condition at this time." As rationale, she stated that "the [service treatment records] revealed one instance of thyromegaly or enlarged thyroid found on separation exam, [but] the laboratory evaluation did not confirm or indicate a possible thyroid condition. Subsequent exams state no evidence of thyromegaly and no evidence of thyroid hormones abnormalities." After careful review of the record, the Board finds that the most probative evidence does not support a thyroid disorder at any time during the appeal period. See Brammer, 3 Vet. App. at 225. Dr. J.T. concluded that there is no objective evidence of any current thyroid disorder. As Dr. J.T. rendered a persuasive medical opinion based on her examination of the Veteran and review of the claims file, her findings are entitled to significant probative weight. See Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295, 304 (2008). The Board also notes that VA and private medical records do not show any active thyroid disorder during the appeal period, and several physical examinations were negative for thyroid symptoms. Thus, a current disability is not established, and service connection must be denied. The Veteran's lay testimony has been considered. Nevertheless, the ability to diagnose a current thyroid disorder and link it to military service requires complex medical knowledge that is beyond the capacity of a lay person. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377 n.4 (Fed. Cir. 2007). As such, the Board affords higher probative weight to the competent medical evidence. The Board recognizes that the Veteran's separation examination showed thyromegaly and enlarged thyroid in July 2000. However, applicable law requires a current disability proximate to the appeal period in order to support a claim of service connection, which the most probative evidence does not reflect in this case. 38 U.S.C. § 1110. In sum, as the most probative evidence does not support a current thyroid disorder at any point during the rating period, an essential element of service connection is not met. Therefore, the claim must be denied. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107(a) ("[A] claimant has the responsibility to present and support a claim for benefits...."). ANTHONY C. SCIRÉ, JR Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Reed, Associate Counsel 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.