Citation Nr: 18151320 Decision Date: 11/19/18 Archive Date: 11/16/18 DOCKET NO. 16-14 077 DATE: November 19, 2018 ORDER The claim of entitlement to service connection for degenerative right knee disability is denied. The claim of entitlement to service connection for degenerative left knee disability is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The record does not reflect that the Veteran suffers from a current right knee disability that manifested during, or as a result of, active military service. 2. The record does not reflect that the Veteran suffers from a current left knee disability that manifested during, or as a result of, active military service. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for establishing entitlement to service connection for a degenerative right knee condition has not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1112, 1121, and 5107 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.6, 3.307 and 3.309 (2018); 38 C.F.R. § 4.71a (2018) (Diagnostic Code 5257). 2. The criteria for establishing entitlement to service connection for a degenerative left knee condition has not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1112, 1121, and 5107 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.6, 3.307 and 3.309 (2018); 38 C.F.R. § 4.71a (2018) (Diagnostic Code 5257). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran had honorable active duty service during the Vietnam Era with the United States Army from January 1970 to December 1971. The Veteran appeals the Rating Decision from February 2014 from the Regional Office (RO) in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. No hearing was requested. VA has a duty to notify and assist a claimant in the development of a claim. 38 U.S.C. §§ 5100, 5102, 5103, 5103A, 5106, 5107, and 5126 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.156(a), 3.159, and 3.326(a) (2018). Compliant VCAA notice was provided in September 2012. In addition, the Board finds that the duty to assist a claimant has been satisfied. The Veteran’s service treatment records are on file, as are various post-service medical records. VA examinations were conducted and medical opinions obtained. Service Connection Generally, service connection will be granted for a disability resulting from an injury or disease caused or aggravated by service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131 (2012). A grant of service connection for a disability requires: (1) a present disability or persistent or recurrent symptoms of a disability; (2) an in-service incurrence of aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship (“nexus”) between the present disability and the in-service event, injury, or disease. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (2018); see Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2013). Lay assertions may serve to support a claim for service connection by establishing the occurrence of observable events or the presence of disability or symptoms of disability subject to lay observation. 38 U.S.C. § 1153 (a) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (a) (2018); Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007); see also Buchanan v. Nicholson, 451 F. 3d 1331, 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (addressing lay evidence as potentially competent to support presence of disability even where not corroborated by contemporaneous medical evidence). The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) has clarified that lay evidence can be competent and sufficient to establish a diagnosis or etiology when (1) a lay person is competent to identify a medical condition; (2) the lay person is reporting a contemporaneous medical diagnosis, or (3) lay testimony describing symptoms at the time supports a later diagnosis by a medical professional. Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2009). 1. Left and right knee degenerative conditions In order to meet the first element for service connection, the Veteran must have a current disability. Here, the Veteran suffers limited range of motion in both his right and left knees after repetitive motion as noted in a VA examination from February 2014. There was no evidence of pain throughout the range of motion, however, during this examination. The Veteran was noted to have swelling in both legs as well as less movement than is normal. A specific diagnosis of degenerative joint disease, bilaterally, was assigned. Therefore, the first element of a current disability has been met. The second element for service connection requires that there be an in-service injury or disease that afflicted the Veteran. According to the Veteran’s December 1969 induction examination, an evaluation of the lower extremities, spine and other musculoskeletal system was deemed to be normal. The Veteran’s subsequent service treatment records (STRs) do not reflect that he was treated for a knee condition or any associated symptomatology during his active military service. Further, according to his November 1971 separation, the Veteran wrote that “[t]here has been no change in my health since my last examination.” The STRs do note that the Veteran visited an Aid Station in June 1970 but the reason for the visit is not noted. Here, there is no mention of any injury or disease that could be related to the Veteran’s knees. Still, the Veteran noted in the Form 9 from February 2014 that he was forced to run around the squad when the squad was marching, rather than marching with the squad. The Veteran noted that he was made to “double time” when his squad marched because he broke the monkey bars. The Veteran is competent to report that he ran around the squad rather than marching with the squad. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(a)(2) (2018); See Clemons v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 1 (2009). However, the third element for service connection requires that there is a competent connection, or nexus, between the in-service event, injury, or disease, and the Veteran’s current disability. A medical opinion from a VA Examination performed in February 2014 found that it was less likely than not that the Veteran’s bilateral knee disability was incurred in or caused by military service. The examiner further states that since “the Veteran does not have a history of injury to the knees or a preexisting damaged knee while in service, the Veteran’s military service does NOT [sic] provide a nexus for the development[t] of degenerative joint disease of the knees.” There are no other applicable medical opinions of record that support the third element of service connection. As such, there is no nexus between the Veteran’s in-service injury and his current disability. In making this decision, the Board considered all the evidence of record to make appropriate determinations regarding its competence, credibility, and weight. Washington v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 362, 368 (2005). The Board recognizes that the Veteran believes his bilateral knee disabilities are due to running during military service. However, there is no evidence of record to demonstrate that the Veteran has the requisite training or expertise to offer such a complex medical opinion. Since the preponderance of the evidence is against the claims, the provisions of 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b) regarding reasonable doubt are not applicable. The claims of entitlement to service connection for right and left knee disabilities must be denied. B. MULLINS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD S. N. P. Jochem, Associate Counsel