Citation Nr: 21062057 Decision Date: 10/06/21 Archive Date: 10/06/21 DOCKET NO. 17-49 066 DATE: October 6, 2021 ORDER The petition to reopen the claim for service connection for a left lower extremity condition is denied. The petition to reopen the claim for service connection for a low back condition is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. An August 2011 rating decision denied service connection for a left lower extremity condition. The appellant did not appeal the decision, and new and material evidence was not received within one year of notice of its issuance. 2. A December 2012 rating decision denied service connection for a low back condition. The appellant did not appeal the decision, and new and material evidence was not received within one year of notice of its issuance. 3. The evidence received since the August 2011 and December 2012 rating decisions is cumulative and redundant, and neither relates to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claim nor raises a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria to reopen the claim for service connection for a left lower extremity condition have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 5108; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.156. 2. The criteria to reopen the claim for service connection for a low back condition have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 5108; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.156. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The appellant served on active duty for training from February 1971 to April 1971. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from an October 2016 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In July 2021, the appellant was scheduled for a videoconference hearing. He failed to report for his hearing. The hearing request is deemed withdrawn because he failed to report for his scheduled hearing and no request for postponement was received. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.703, 20.704. Service Connection 1. The petition to reopen the claim for service connection for a left lower extremity condition is denied. 2. The petition to reopen the claim for service connection for a low back condition is denied. The appellant seeks to reopen his claim for service connection for a left lower extremity condition and a low back condition. The Secretary must reopen a finally disallowed claim when new and material evidence is presented or secured with respect to that claim. 38 U.S.C. § 5108; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156. New evidence means existing evidence not previously submitted to agency decision makers. 38 C.F.R. § 3.156 (a). Material evidence means existing evidence that, by itself or when considered with previous evidence of record, relates to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claim. Id. New and material evidence can be neither cumulative nor redundant of the evidence of record at the time of the last prior final denial of the claim sought to be reopened and must raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim. Id. Service connection for a low back condition and a left lower extremity condition were first denied in a May 1993 rating decision because the evidence did not show treatment for the conditions in service. The appellant was advised of the decision and his appellate rights in a May 1993 correspondence; however, he did not enter a notice of disagreement and no additional relevant evidence was received within one year. Therefore, the May 1993 rating decision is final. See 38 U.S.C. §7105; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.156 (b), 20.1103; Buie v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 242, 252 (2010). In February 2011, the appellant sought to reopen his claim for service connection. An August 2011 rating decision denied service connection because the evidence did not demonstrate a nexus between the appellant's claimed disabilities and service. The appellant was advised of the decision and his appellate rights in an August 2011 correspondence. In October 2011, the appellant submitted a request for reconsideration of his claim for a low back condition. In July 2012, the appellant filed an informal claim for back injury incurred while in basic training. A December 2012 rating decision denied service connection for a low back condition because the evidence continued to not reflect a medical link between the claimed condition and his military service. The appellant was advised of the decision and his appellate rights in a December 2012 correspondence; however, he did not enter a notice of disagreement and no additional relevant evidence was received within one year. Therefore, the August 2011 and December 2012 rating decisions are final. The appellant sought to reopen his claims in July 2016. Evidence received since the August 2011 and December 2012 rating decisions include lay statements, VA treatment records, and private treatment records that reflect pain in the left lower extremity. After a review of the evidentiary record, the Board finds that new and material evidence has not been received to reopen the claims. While the treatment records are new, they are not material because they merely indicate that the appellant has left extremity pain, a fact already known and considered in the prior denial. Similarly, the submitted lay statements reiterate the appellant's previous reports of injuring his back during training. None of the newly submitted evidence establishes a causal relationship between the current condition and service or establishes that the conditions onset in service. Thus, it does not relate to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claim. Further, the appellant has not presented any new evidence that would create a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim or that would trigger the need for a VA examination or medical opinion pursuant to Shade. The threshold for reopening a claim is low, but it is a threshold, nonetheless. See Shade v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 110, 118 (2010). As the appellant has not fulfilled the threshold burden of submitting new and material evidence, the petition to reopen the final disallowed claims of service connection for a left lower extremity condition and a low back condition is denied. D. JOHNSON Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board M.Aoughsten, 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.