Citation Nr: 21075559 Decision Date: 12/20/21 Archive Date: 12/20/21 DOCKET NO. 20-02 250 DATE: December 20, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for a right knee disability is granted. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran's right knee disability is etiologically related to service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to service connection for a right knee disability have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1112, 1113, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active duty service with the United States Marine Corps from June 1974 to June 1978. He was additionally a member of the Army National Guard and Reserves, with multiple periods of active duty for special work (ADSW) to participate in shooting competitions. This case comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2018 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ). The Veteran testified during a virtual hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) in December 2021. This decision is rendered prior to production of a hearing transcript; given the favorable outcome, the Veteran is not prejudiced by this action. Service Connection Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from a disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). To establish entitlement to service-connected compensation benefits, a Veteran must show: "(1) the existence of a present 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 or aggravated during service-the so-called "nexus" requirement." Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1362, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (quoting Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004)). Service connection may also be granted for disease diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease or injury was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). Some chronic diseases may be presumed to have been incurred in service, if they become manifest to a degree of ten percent or more within the applicable presumptive period. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101(3), 1112(a); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307(a), 3.309(a). For those listed chronic conditions, a showing of continuity of symptoms affords an alternative route to service connection. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b); Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F. 3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2013). Determinations as to service connection will be based on review of the entire evidence of record, to include all pertinent medical and lay evidence, with due consideration to VA's policy to administer the law under a broad and liberal interpretation consistent with the facts in each individual case. 38 U.S.C. § 1154(a); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). The Veteran contends that his current right knee disability was related to his military service. Specifically, he asserted that his right knee disability was related to motorcycle accident that happened during his active service. Service treatment records (STRs) documented complaints of right knee pain following a motorcycle accident. A July 1975 treatment note documented that the Veteran was involved in a motorcycle accident. His injury was confined to the patella/tibia- fibula region. Another July 1975 treatment note documented that Veteran had a cast put on his right leg and there was an impression of a possible torn meniscus. A later July 1975 treatment note documented that the Veteran had his cast taken off while on leave. The Veteran was put on light duty until August. The May 1978 separation examination documented that the Veteran had a normal bilateral lower extremity in the clinical evaluation. Reservist reports of medical examination in October 1987, December 1988, December 1992, and April 1995 documented that the Veteran had a normal bilateral lower extremity in the clinical evaluation. Post service treatment records documented his continued complaints and treatment of a right knee disability. An October 2001 private treatment note documented that he had a right knee arthroscopy. In February 2018, the Veteran was afforded a VA knee condition examination. The examiner opined that the Veteran's right knee disability was less likely than not (less than 50 percent probability) incurred in or caused by the claimed in-service injury, event, or illness. The examiner wrote that the service injury was acute only. She noted that there was no evidence of chronicity of care. Therefore, she concluded that a nexus had not been established. In a May 2021 statement, the Veteran wrote while in-service he was hurt in a motorcycle accident. He noted that he was treated while in-service for his right leg injury. In December 2021, he testified that he was injured when he fell off a motorcycle. He stated that he had a cast put on from hip to foot, for a possible meniscal tear. He reported that he was treated off the record to avoid impact on his promotion and retention in the National Guard and Reserves. He noted that his knee got worse over time and had been continuous. The Board finds the February 2018 VA examiner's opinion inadequate. She provided a conclusory opinion, that was not supported by a detailed rationale. She stated that the injury in-service was acute only and there was no evidence of chronicity of care. There was no reasoning stated for her opinion. The examiner relied solely upon an absence of documentary records of continued treatment, and ignored competent and credible lay evidence. Continuity does not require care, only symptoms. The Board gives no probative weight to the February 2018 opinion. Therefore, the record reflects competent and credible evidence of an injury in service, right knee pain since that time, and a current diagnosis of a right knee disability, based on the presence of pain with functional impairment. Service connection must be granted. WILLIAM H. DONNELLY Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Baxter 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.