Citation Nr: 18153252 Decision Date: 11/27/18 Archive Date: 11/27/18 DOCKET NO. 16-36 129 DATE: November 27, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for nose disability is denied. Entitlement to service connection for sinus disability is denied. REMANDED The issue of entitlement to service connection for left knee disability is remanded. The issue of entitlement to service connection for left elbow disability is remanded. The issue of entitlement to service connection for right elbow disability is remanded. The issue of entitlement to service connection for right knee disability is remanded. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The preponderance of the evidence of record indicates that the Veteran has not had a nose disability during the appeal period. 2. The preponderance of the evidence of record indicates that the Veteran has not had a sinus disability during the appeal period. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for service connection for a nose disability are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (2018). 2. The criteria for service connection for a sinus disability are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (2018). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from November 1974 to November 1978. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals on appeal of a rating decision by a U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). Service Connection To establish service connection a Veteran must show: “(1) the existence of a present disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the present disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service.” Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313, 1315–16 (Fed. Cir. 2009). 1. Entitlement to service connection for a nose disability is denied. The Veteran seeks service connection for a nose disability. The issue for the Board is whether the Veteran has a current disability that began during service or is at least as likely as not related to service. The Board concludes that the Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of any nose disability and has not had one at any time during the pendency of the claim or recent to the filing of the claim. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303; McClain v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 319, 321 (2007). Treatment records do not contain any record of treatment for a nose disability or complaints from the Veteran regarding his nose. The Veteran has not provided any other statements or evidence regarding his claimed nose disability. In the absence of proof of a present disability, there can be no valid claim. Brammer v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 223, 225 (1992). As such, the claim must be denied. 2. Entitlement to service connection for a sinus disability is denied. The Veteran seeks service connection for a sinus disability. The issue for the Board is whether the Veteran has a current disability that began during service or is at least as likely as not related to service. The Board concludes that the Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of any sinus disability and has not had one at any time during the pendency of the claim or recent to the filing of the claim. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303; McClain, supra. Treatment records do not contain any record of treatment for a sinus disability or complaints from the Veteran regarding his sinuses. The Veteran has not provided any other statements or evidence regarding his claimed sinus disability. In the absence of proof of a present disability, there can be no valid claim. See Brammer, supra. As such, this claim must be denied as well. REASONS FOR REMAND 1. Entitlement to service connection for left knee disability is remanded. 2. Entitlement to service connection for left elbow disability is remanded. 3. Entitlement to service connection for right elbow disability is remanded. 4. Entitlement to service connection for right knee disability is remanded. The Board cannot make a fully-informed decision on the issues of service connection for bilateral knee and elbow disabilities because no VA examiner has opined whether the Veteran’s current disabilities are at least as likely as not related to his reported motor vehicle accident while in service. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain VA medical evidence not included in the claims file. 2. Schedule an examination to determine the nature and etiology of any knee and elbow disabilities. After interviewing and examining the Veteran and reviewing the claims file, the examiner should answer the following questions: (a). What are the Veteran’s current knee and elbow disabilities? (b). Is it at least as likely as not (i.e., probability of 50 percent or greater) that a current knee or elbow disorder is related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, including the Veteran’s reported motor vehicle accident? (Continued on the next page)   Please explain in detail any opinion provided. CHRISTOPHER MCENTEE Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD A. Creegan, Associate Counsel