Citation Nr: 21010255 Decision Date: 02/24/21 Archive Date: 02/24/21 DOCKET NO. 15-35 398A DATE: February 24, 2021 ORDER Service connection for a right ankle disorder is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran served on active duty from January 1977 to January 1981; she has been 100 percent disabled since May 2012. 2. A right ankle disorder has not been diagnosed and no functional impairment of the right ankle has been identified. CONCLUSION OF LAW A right ankle disorder was not incurred in service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 5103(a), 5103A, 5107 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.159, 3.303 (2020). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION In November 2016, the Veteran requested a travel board hearing. The hearing was scheduled in March 2019; however, she withdrew her request in a March 2019 letter. Thus, the request is deemed withdrawn and there is no bar to proceeding with the appeal. In May 2019, the Board remanded the appeal for additional development. The case has now been returned to the Board for further appellate action. Turning to the relevant laws and regulations, service connection may be granted on a direct basis as a result of disease or injury incurred in service based on nexus using a three-element test: (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 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). In order to establish service connection, the evidence of record must first indicate a present disability. In this regard, a current disability has not been shown. Specifically, VA treatment records indicate that the Veteran occasionally complained of sporadic ankle pain and swelling; however, no chronic disability was diagnosed or shown in her treatment records and no functional impairment identified. In a July 2020 VA examination, after examining the Veteran and reviewing her medical history, the examiner diagnosed an acute resolved ankle sprain. The examiner recounted the Veteran’s statements about walking down the street in Korea, falling on an uneven sidewalk, and spraining her right ankle. She reported that her right ankle was swollen and painful at that time. The Veteran reported that currently she had no pain, although she was falling a lot and experienced pain in her right ankle when walking for long distances. She denied any physical therapy or other treatment for her right ankle, stating that she only took two Tylenol tablets at night. She denied any flare-ups and any functional loss or impairment of her right ankle. Upon examination, range of motion measurements were all within normal limits, and no objective evidence of pain, localized tenderness, or palpation of the joint issue was noted. She was able to perform repetitive use testing without any loss of range of motion, and there was no reduction in muscle strength. There was no ankle instability or dislocation, muscle atrophy, or other ruptures or injuries. The examiner also noted that there was no evidence of pain when the joint was used in weight bearing or non-weight bearing. The examiner reflected that the Veteran reported right ankle pain on and off, but there was no pain on assessment at the examination. The examiner opined that the entire assessment was within normal limits, without swelling, tenderness on palpation, or pain on weightbearing. The examiner reasoned that the symptoms described by the Veteran were subjective only and that the objective examination was normal. The examiner also opined that there was no evidence of a chronic condition, or a nexus between her in-service injury. The post-service treatment records were also reviewed. As noted above, sporadic complaints of ankle pain were noted; however, there is no indication that the Veteran was ever diagnosed with a chronic ankle disability and she, by her own admission, has not sought any treatment for a chronic ankle disability and no functional impairment has been identified. Therefore, the medical evidence does not support a finding that a current disorder or functional impairment related to the right ankle has been shown and the first element of service connection is not met. Service connection may not be granted for a diagnosis of a disability by history. Sanchez-Benitez v. West, 13 Vet. App. 282 (1999). The Board has considered the Veteran’s lay statements that her disorder was caused by service. She is competent to report symptoms because this requires only personal knowledge as it comes to her through her senses. However, she is not competent to diagnose a chronic disorder due to the medical complexity of the matter involved. Such competent evidence has been provided by the service records, clinical evidence, and examination obtained and associated with the claims file. Here, the Board attaches greater probative weight to the clinical findings than to her statements. In light of the above, the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim for service connection and there is no doubt to be otherwise resolved. As such, the appeal is denied. Finally, the Veteran has not raised any other issues, nor have any other issues been reasonably raised by the record, for the Board’s consideration. See Doucette v. Shulkin, 28 Vet. App. 366, 369-370 (2017) (confirming that the Board is not required to address issues unless they are specifically raised by the claimant or reasonably raised by the evidence of record). L. HOWELL Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Yacoub, 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.