Citation Nr: 21068642 Decision Date: 11/12/21 Archive Date: 11/12/21 DOCKET NO. 20-01 528 DATE: November 12, 2021 ORDER New and material evidence having been presented, reopening of the claim for service connection for a right knee/leg disability is granted. Entitlement to service connection for a right knee/leg disability is granted. INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from August 1974 to November 1974. In October 2021, the Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge at a virtual hearing. The Veteran previously submitted a claim for entitlement to service connection for a right leg disability, which was denied in a May 1976 rating decision on the basis that the claimed disability existed prior to service and was not aggravated therein. That decision became final because the Veteran did not timely appeal the claim within the appeal period. In connection with the Veteran's claim to reopen, he recently submitted statements indicating his current right knee disability was incurred during a training accident in service, and is unrelated to his prior tibial fracture which he has indicated healed without residual impairment. This new evidence is material as to the basis of the prior denial, because it tends to provide favorable information which disputes the prior findings. Thus, the Board finds sufficient new and material evidence has been received to reopen his previously denied claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.156 (a); Shade v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 110, 117-18 (2010); Justus v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 510, 513 (1992). FINDING OF FACT The Veteran's current right knee/leg disability is etiologically related to his active service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for a right knee/leg disability have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION Legal Criteria Service connection may be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Service connection may be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disability was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (d). Factual Background and Analysis The Veteran seeks service connection for a right knee/leg disability, which he contends originated in service. The medical evidence confirms the Veteran has undergone a right total knee replacement. As such, the central issue that must be resolved at this time is whether the Veteran's current disability originated during service or is otherwise related to service. Initially, the Board notes the Veteran's service treatment records show his lower extremities were assessed as normal at the time of his June 1974 entrance examination. His records show he sustained an injury to his right leg after experiencing a fall during training in October 1974. The Veteran has reported experiencing ongoing knee and leg pain since that time. In June 2019, the Veteran underwent a VA examination. Following examination the examiner noted the Veteran's history of a right tibial fracture prior to service, as well as a 2016 total right knee arthroplasty surgery. The examiner then concluded the Veteran's disability was neither incurred in nor aggravated by his military service. In support of this conclusion, the examiner found no evidence of an in-service injury. However, as noted above, the Veteran's service treatment records do indicate he reported a fall in October 1974 with the onset of pain in the knee and leg thereafter. A medical opinion based on an incorrect factual premise is not probative. See Reonal v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 458, 460-61 (1993). In this case, the Board must determine the value of all evidence submitted, including lay and medical evidence. Buchanan v. Nicholson, 451 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2006). The evaluation of evidence generally involves a 3-step inquiry. First, the Board must determine whether the evidence comes from a "competent" source. The Board must then determine if the evidence is credible, or worthy of belief. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303 (2007) (Observing that once evidence is determined to be competent, the Board must determine whether such evidence is also credible). The third step of this inquiry requires the Board to weigh the probative value of the proffered evidence in light of the entirety of the record. The Board also notes that under certain circumstances, lay evidence may be sufficient to establish a nexus. See Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313, 1316 (Fed. Cir. 2009); see also Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 469 (1994). Lay evidence has been found to be competent with regard to a disease that has "unique and readily identifiable features" that are "capable of lay observation." See Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 308-09 (2007); see also Petitti v. McDonald, 27 Vet. App. 415, 427-28 (2015) (where the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims found objective evidence of pain need not come from a medical professional; a lay person may provide the requisite confirmation). Here, the Veteran has reported that he experienced ongoing right knee and leg pain following his in-service injury. The Board finds the Veteran competent to report his experiences. It is generally within the competence of a lay person to identify and observe the effect of a disability under the ordinary conditions of daily life. Many symptoms are readily observable by a lay person. Accordingly, the lay evidence provided by the Veteran is unquestionably competent evidence. Further, the Board finds the Veteran's own reports of ongoing pain to be highly probative, as the Veteran is indeed the only person truly capable of such observation. Moreover, the Board finds no reason to doubt his veracity. In sum, the Board is satisfied that the evidence supporting a nexus between the Veteran's currently diagnosed right knee/leg disability and his in-service injuries is at least in equipoise with the evidence against a nexus. Therefore, the Veteran is entitled to service connection for his right knee/leg disability. T. REYNOLDS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board G. Fraser, 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.