Citation Nr: 21062429 Decision Date: 10/07/21 Archive Date: 10/07/21 DOCKET NO. 17-31 443 DATE: October 7, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for residuals of right foot injury (previously claimed as fractured metatarsals of the feet) is denied. FINDING OF FACT The preponderance of the evidence is against finding that residuals of right foot injury began during active service, or is otherwise related to an in-service event, injury, or disease. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for residuals of right foot injury are not met. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304, 3.309. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty with the Army from July 1978 to June 1984. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a November 2015 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge at a Travel Board hearing in November 2019. A transcript of the proceeding has been associated with the claims file. In December 2019, the Board remanded the issue on appeal for further development, and the case has since been returned to the Board. The Board finds that the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) has substantially complied with the remand directives. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). Service Connection Service connection may be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. The three-element test for service connection requires evidence of: (1) 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 in-service disease or injury. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166 -67 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Entitlement to service connection for residuals of right foot injury (previously claimed as fractured metatarsals of the feet) The Veteran contends that after repeated and prolonged marching in Alaska, his feet would swell up resulting in stress fractures and frostbite. The available service treatment records indicate the Veteran was diagnosed with Prograted Syndrome of both feet and was restricted in the running, crawling, jumping, walking, or standing to less than 15 minutes. The Veteran's VA treatment records indicate that the Veteran has a current diagnosis of mild degenerative changes in his metatarsophalangeal joint on the right foot but no discussion on its etiology. A January 2021 examination from Bayview Radiology reveals a diagnosis of mild great toe interphalangeal joint osteoarthritis but not discussion on its etiology. In January 2021, the Veteran attended a VA Foot Conditions examination. The examiner diagnosed bilateral pes planus. Further, he opined that the Veteran's condition was less likely than not incurred in or caused by the claimed in-service injury, event, or illness. The rationale provided stated: The in service medical records do not mention any stress fractures or frostbite. Some of the records are missing from the STR's. Without any supporting evidence and based on today's exam, fractures and frostbite cannot be confirmed nor do they indicate on the exam any residuals. His major issue is flat feet which he had upon entering service in 1978, but it was asymptomatic. His flat feet have worsened over the years due to wear and tear. It is unlikely that stress fractures or frostbite would cause flat feet or arthritis. The medical record does not indicate a right foot pathology that is related to his in service time. His right foot pathology is likely related to the natural progression of flat feet. The remaining evidence indicates continued complaints and treatment of a right foot injury but no discussion on its etiology. Based on the foregoing evidence of record, the Board finds that service connection is not warranted. The Board finds the January 2021 VA opinion of record the most probative evidence of record as to the etiology of the Veteran's right foot residuals injury because it is based on an accurate medical history and provides an explanation that contain clear conclusions and supporting data. Further, it is noted that the record is silent for a medical opinion stating otherwise. The Board considered the Veteran's lay assertions as to the etiology of his claimed disability. Although the Veteran is competent to attest to his experiences, he is not competent in these circumstances to opine as to the etiology of his right foot residuals injury. The Veteran has not been shown to have specialized medical knowledge that would be necessary to provide a competent opinion regarding service connection. The Board finds the VA opinion of record to be more probative in this regard. The examiner considered the Veteran's history, and ultimately concluded that from a medical perspective, it is less likely that his claimed disability is related to service. In conclusion, the weight of the evidence is against the claim for service connection for right foot residuals injury. L. M. BARNARD Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board R. A. Elliott II, 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.