Citation Nr: 21062608 Decision Date: 10/08/21 Archive Date: 10/08/21 DOCKET NO. 18-11 185 DATE: October 8, 2021 ORDER Service connection for arthritis of the right talonavicular joint is granted. FINDING OF FACT Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, the arthritis of her right talonavicular joint is etiologically related to her active service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for arthritis of the right talonavicular joint have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from January 1973 to April 1976. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2016 rating decision. In July 2021, the Veteran testified at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ). A transcript of the hearing has been associated with the Veteran's claims file. Service Connection Right Talonavicular Joint Arthritis 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: 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). Service connection requires competent evidence of (1) a current disability; (2) the incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury during service; and (3) a causal relationship between the current disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Service connection may be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). Additionally, service connection can also be established through application of a statutory presumption for chronic diseases when manifested to a compensable degree within a year of separation from service. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307, 3.309. If a chronic disease is not manifested to a compensable degree within a year of separation of service, then, generally, a showing of "continuity of symptoms" after service is required for service connection. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b). Furthermore, a layperson is competent to report on the onset and continuity of his or her current symptomatology. Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 470 (1994) (a veteran is competent to report on that of which he or she has personal knowledge). When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, VA shall resolve reasonable doubt in favor of the claimant. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). To deny a claim on its merits, the evidence must preponderate against the claim. Alemany v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 518 (1996). The Veteran contends that her right foot disability is due to her active service. Review of her service treatment records shows that she was treated for right foot and ankle injuries multiple times between January 1973 and July 1974. Further, she has a current diagnosis of arthritis of the right talonavicular joint. See December 2016 CAPRI record. Thus, she meets the current diagnosis and in-service event elements of this claim, and the only remaining issue is whether a nexus (causal relationship) exists between her right foot disability and her active service. In this regard, at the July 2021 hearing, the Veteran testified that she injured her right foot multiple times during service and has continued to have issues with her right foot since separation from service. The Veteran was afforded a VA examination in December 2016. The examiner noted that, during service, the Veteran twisted her right foot and ankle in bootcamp, which required the use of crutches; dropped a large crate on her right foot; and punctured her right foot on a twig, which required antibiotic treatment. The examiner also noted that there were no foot conditions mentioned at the Veteran's separation examination but that the Veteran did seek treatment for various foot conditions after service. The examiner determined that the Veteran's right foot disability was less likely than not incurred in or caused by her active service based on the lack of medical evidence to suggest a continued right foot condition related to her in-service puncture wound. While the Board cannot ignore or disregard the VA examiner's medical conclusions, the Board is free to assess medical evidence and is not compelled to accept a medical opinion. See Willis v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 66 (1991); Wilson v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 614 (1992). Here, the examiner only discussed the Veteran's in-service right foot puncture wound in her rationale and did not address whether the other injuries the Veteran sustained during service could be related to her current right talonavicular joint arthritis. Thus, the Board finds this opinion to be inadequate and affords it little, if any, probative value. Based on the above, the Board finds that the evidence of record is at least in equipoise as to whether the Veteran's right talonavicular joint arthritis is related to her active service. Resolving any reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, the Board finds that her right foot disability is etiologically related to her active (CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE) service. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); Gilbert, 1 Vet. App. at 49. Thus, service connection for right talonavicular joint arthritis is granted. THERESA M. CATINO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board C. Benson, 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.