Citation Nr: 21076548 Decision Date: 12/27/21 Archive Date: 12/27/21 DOCKET NO. 16-61 199 DATE: December 27, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for a left foot condition, other than flat foot, is denied. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran does not have a current left foot disability other than flat foot. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to service connection for a left foot condition, other than flat foot, are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1110, 5107 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 4.71a, Diagnostic Code 5284. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from January 2012 to June 2013. This appeal comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from an April 2014 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) which granted service connection for bilateral pes planus (flat foot) but denied service connection for an additional left foot condition. In July 2018 and September 2021 decisions, the Board remanded the case for new VA examinations. The RO issued a supplemental statement of case (SSOC) in June 2021 and in October 2021 and the case was returned to the Board for adjudication. 1. Entitlement to service connection for a left foot condition, other than flat foot The Veteran is seeking service connection for a left foot condition other than flat foot. Service connection may be established for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. § 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). In general, there must be competent 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 disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service. See Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1363, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009). Service connection may be granted for any disease initially diagnosed after service when all of the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). The question for the Board is whether the Veteran has a current disability that began during service or is at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. The Board finds that the Veteran does not have a current left foot disability other than his service-connected flat foot condition and has not had one at any time during the pendency of the claim or recent to the filing of the claim. Romanowsky v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 289, 294 (2013); McClain v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 319, 321 (2007). The appeal arises from an October 2013 claim. See VA Form 21-526EZ, Fully Developed Claim (Compensation) rec'd October 18, 2013. Although the Veteran is service-connected for bilateral flat feet, there is no evidence that he was diagnosed with, or treated for a separate left foot condition since he filed his October 2013 claim. In addition, the Veteran stated that he made a mistake and that he should have claimed a right foot condition. See October 2021 VA Examination. A July 2020 VA examiner stated there was no medical evidence of a left foot injury, but rather the evidence indicated an injury to the right ankle. A June 2021 VA examination noted a sledgehammer injury to the right foot, not the left foot. The Veteran was diagnosed with bilateral pes planus (flat feet) and plantar fascitis. There were no additional diagnosed left foot conditions. Id. During an October 2021 VA examination, the Veteran stated he injured his right foot, not his left. The examiner opined the Veteran did not have any additional left foot conditions separate from flat foot. Id. The evidence of record does not support that the Veteran had a left foot disability separate from flat foot at, on or after the filing of the instant claim, and in fact, the Veteran denied any additional left foot condition during his October 2021 VA examination. His VA examinations in July 2020, June 2021 and October 2021 are consistent that the Veteran has bilateral flat feet without evidence of an additional left foot condition. Therefore, based upon review of the entire record, the Board finds the preponderance of the evidence does not establish that the Veteran had an additional left foot condition, other than flat foot, during the pendency of his claim. (Continued on the next page) As the Veteran does not currently have a disability for VA purposes, the claim for entitlement to service connection for a left foot condition, other than flat foot, must be denied. The benefit-of-the-doubt doctrine is not applicable. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. B. G. LeMoine Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board C. Aubee, 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.