Citation Nr: 18159855 Decision Date: 12/20/18 Archive Date: 12/20/18 DOCKET NO. 16-54 893 DATE: December 20, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for a left knee disorder, including a left knee meniscal tear, is granted. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran was on active duty as a midshipman at the United States Naval Academy at the time of his September 1989 left knee injury. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to service connection for a left knee disorder, including a left knee meniscal tear, have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1100, 1131, 5107(b) (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.6, 3.102, 3.303 (2017). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from May 1991 to May 2001, from February 2002 to February 2003, and from December 8, 2010 to December 9, 2010. He also attended the United States Naval Academy from 1987 to 1991. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2015 rating decision of the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Boise, Idaho. The RO in Hartford, Connecticut, currently has jurisdiction over the case. Service connection means that a disability resulting from disease or injury was incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). Service connection may be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge when all of the evidence establishes that the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). Service connection is established when the following elements are satisfied: (1) the existence of a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the current disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service (the medical “nexus” requirement). Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1363, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (quoting Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166-67 (Fed. Cir. 2004)); see 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). Service at any time as a midshipman at the United States Naval Academy is defined as “active duty” for VA qualifying active military, naval, and air service requirements, and thus the Board will consider that period of service as active duty in its adjudication of the Veteran’s claim, in addition to the periods of active service noted above. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.6(b)(4). The Veteran’s service treatment records (STRs) show that on July 1, 1987 he was found to be physically qualified for duty as a midshipman at the U.S. Naval Academy. In September 1989, it was noted that he injured his left knee while training for a marathon. See September 1989 STR; Military Personnel Record (reflecting the Veteran injured his left knee while on active duty at the US Naval Academy). The STRs also show that the Veteran injured his left knee in a bicycle accident in December 1993 and was placed on physical therapy. The Veteran was afforded a VA examination in July 2015. The examiner noted that the Veteran originally injured his knee in 1989 and was diagnosed with a medial collateral ligament (MCL) sprain. The Veteran reported that he continued to have intermittent knee pain since that time. In March 2013, he was diagnosed with a left knee medial meniscal tear and an associated meniscal cyst. The Veteran subsequently underwent a partial meniscectomy. See July 2015 VA C&P Examination Report; March 2013 MRI. The examiner determined that even though the Veteran had a new injury in 2013, the meniscal tear was related to the 1989 knee injury. She noted that the cyst found on the Veteran’s MRI indicates a chronicity of the condition. Further, she reasoned that MCL injuries are commonly associated with meniscus injuries. Given the foregoing, the Board finds that a preponderance of the evidence weighs in favor of the Veteran’s claim. Accordingly, service connection for a left knee disorder, including a left knee meniscal tear, is granted. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102 (providing, in pertinent part, that reasonable doubt will be resolved in favor of the claimant). See Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 55 (1990); see also Wise v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 517, 532 (2014). P.M. DILORENZO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD L. Sinckler, Associate Counsel