Citation Nr: A21017708 Decision Date: 11/02/21 Archive Date: 11/02/21 DOCKET NO. 200204-67601 DATE: November 2, 2021 ORDER Service connection for a bilateral foot condition is granted. FINDING OF FACT The weight of the evidence is at least in relative equipoise as to whether the Veteran has a bilateral foot condition that is related to his active service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for a bilateral foot condition have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Navy from August 1976 to August 1979. Historically, the Veteran's claim was denied in May 2017 under the legacy appeal system. In June 2018, the Veteran filed a Notice of Disagreement (NOD) in disagreement to the May 2017 denial. In September 2018, the Veteran opted into VA's Rapid Appeals Modernization Program (RAMP), thereby withdrawing his claim under the legacy system, and moving them to the modernized review system, known by the Board as the AMA. The Veteran selected the higher-level review lane. A February 2019 rating decision was issued under the RAMP program and denied the claim. In November 2019, the Veteran submitted a supplemental claim for his claimed bilateral foot condition. The January 2020 rating decision denied the claim as well. Because that decision found that new and relevant evidence had been submitted, that determination is a favorable finding that binds the Board; accordingly, a new and relevant evidence analysis is not required here. In February 2020, the Veteran filed a VA Form 10182 Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (NOD) for the issue of service connection for a bilateral foot condition. The Veteran selected the Hearing Lane in which he would have an opportunity to testify before a Veterans Law Judge and submit additional evidence in support of his claim within 90 days after his hearing. The Veteran appeared at videoconference hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in June 2021. A transcript of the hearing is in the Veteran's file. Service connection for a bilateral foot condition. The Veteran is seeking service connection for a bilateral foot condition. He contends that his bilateral foot condition is related to active service, to include the wearing of steel-toe boots. Service connection may be granted directly as a result of disease or injury incurred in service based on nexus using a three-element test: (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 present disability and the disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by service. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303 (a), (d); Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1363, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009). Here, the Veteran contends that he currently suffers from bilateral foot condition is related to his active service. For the reasons that follow, his claim shall be granted. First, both VA and private treatment records clearly demonstrate that the Veteran has been diagnosed with bilateral flat foot, and degenerative arthritis of his feet. As to the second element for direct service connection, in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury, review of the Veteran's service treatment records revealed no evidence of foot issues during active service. The Veteran, however, contends that he experienced bilateral foot pain during service due to having to wear steel toe boots. The Board notes that the Veteran is competent to give evidence about what he experienced, to include foot pain, is subject to lay observation. See e.g., Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465 (1994); Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007); Buchanan v. Nicholson, 451 F.3d 1331, 1337 (2006). The Veteran's claim has been denied on the basis that his current bilateral foot disability is less likely than not related to his active service. See November 2018 and December 2019 VA examination reports. Most recently, the December 2019 VA examination report found that the Veteran's bilateral foot condition was unrelated to his active service primarily due to the absence of a bilateral foot condition during service. The Board finds the December 2019 VA examination report to be inadequate for rating purposes as the VA examiner solely based the medical opinion on the absence of in-service diagnosis or complaint. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 311 (2007). As such, the December 2019 VA examination report should be of limited probative value. In support of his contention, the Veteran has submitted an opinion from Dr. M. Scuziano, MD. See June 2021 Private Medical Opinion. Dr. Scuziano opined that it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran's bilateral foot condition was caused by his active service. Moreover, the Veteran also has supplied his own testimony and buddy statements supporting his contention that his bilateral foot condition is related to his active service. When read together, and resolving any reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Board finds that the evidence regarding whether the Veteran's current disability is related to his ative service to be at least in equipoise. Accordingly, the Board determines that the Veteran's current bilateral foot disabilities are related to his in-service complaints of foot pain. In summary, the preponderance of the evidence is for finding that bilateral foot condition is related to his active-duty service, and service connection is granted. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (b); Walker, 708 F.3d at 1338. Evan M. Deichert Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board J.R. Higgins 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.