Citation Nr: 18154307 Decision Date: 11/29/18 Archive Date: 11/29/18 DOCKET NO. 16-53 756 DATE: November 29, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for left ankle disability is denied. REMANDED The issue of entitlement to service connection for lower back disability is remanded. FINDING OF FACT The preponderance of evidence is against a finding that the Veteran has a current diagnosis of left ankle condition. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for left ankle disability have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1110 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (2018). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active service from May to November 2006 and from January to August 2010. The record indicates that he served in the U.S. Army Reserve from February 2006 to February 2014. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal of a rating decision by a U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). Service Connection for Left Ankle Disorder The Veteran claims that he incurred left ankle disability during active service. Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). As a general matter, service connection for a disability requires evidence of: (1) the existence of a current disability; (2) the existence of the disease or injury in service, and; (3) a relationship or nexus between the current disability and any injury or disease during service. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163 (Fed. Cir. 2004). In the absence of proof of a present disability, there can be no valid claim. Brammer v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 223, 225 (Fed. Cir. 1992). When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, the benefit of the doubt will be granted to the claimant. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102; Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 53 (1990). To deny a claim on the merits, the preponderance of the evidence must be against the claim. Alemany v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 518, 519 (1996). In November 2016, the Veteran’s representative stated that the current record establishes service-connection for a left ankle disability. However, the statement does not point to any specific documentation establishing service connection for this disorder. The service treatment records (STRs) do not evidence left ankle disability. Further, the other medical records in the claims file do not evidence the diagnosis of left ankle disability. As such, the first element of a service connection claim – evidence of a current disability – is lacking here. The claim must be denied, therefore. See Brammer, supra. REASONS FOR REMAND A remand of the service connection claim for back disability is warranted for additional development and medical inquiry. The STRs indicate that the Veteran experienced back problems during service. Further, he claims to have received VA treatment for back disability. In a March 2017 statement, the Veteran indicated treatment at a VA medical facility in Los Angeles. He stated that a VA doctor assessed him with nerve damage, a bulging disc, an arthritic back, and mild scoliosis. A review of the current claims file does not contain records of such treatment. Thus, it appears there are outstanding VA treatment records, and a remand is necessary in order to obtain those records and any other outstanding private or VA treatment records. Further, if VA medical evidence indicates a current back disability, the Veteran should be provided a VA examination. See McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain any outstanding VA treatment records pertinent to the Veteran’s back condition to include medical treatment records from a VA facility in Los Angeles, California, or any other VA medical facility that may have treated the Veteran, and associate those documents with the claims file. 2. If VA or other medical evidence establishes the presence of a lower back disability, schedule an examination to determine the nature and etiology of lower back disability. After reviewing the claims file and interviewing and examining the Veteran, the examiner should answer the following question: Is it at least as likely as not (i.e., 50 percent or greater probability) that lower back disability relates to an event, injury or disease experienced during active service? In answering this question, address the evidence in STRs indicating back problems during service. Please explain in detail any opinion provided. CHRISTOPHER MCENTEE Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD J. Yang, Law Clerk