Citation Nr: 21013879 Decision Date: 03/10/21 Archive Date: 03/10/21 DOCKET NO. 15-39 669 DATE: March 10, 2021 ORDER Service connection for a right knee disability is granted. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran began experiencing symptoms of a right knee disability while serving on active duty and has continued to experience such symptoms since separating from service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for a right knee disability have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from October 1971 to August 1973. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2013 rating decision. Service Connection Service connection will be granted if the evidence demonstrates that a current disability resulted from an injury or disease incurred in or aggravated by active military service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Service connection requires competent evidence showing: (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. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163 (Fed. Cir. 2004). 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). Additionally, service connection can also be established through application of a statutory presumption for chronic diseases when manifested to a compensable degree within a year of separation from service. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307, 3.309. If a chronic disease is not manifested to a compensable degree within a year of separation of service, then, generally, a showing of “continuity of symptoms” after service is required for service connection. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b). Furthermore, a layperson is competent to report on the onset and continuity of his or her current symptomatology. Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 470 (1994) (a veteran is competent to report on that of which he or she has personal knowledge). As an initial matter, the Veteran has a current diagnosis of gout of his right knee. Thus, the current disability element for service connection has been met. The Veteran contends that he sustained an injury to his right knee while in service and that it is the cause of his current disability. To support his claim, the Veteran has provided VA with buddy statements from his wife and a former shipmate. In his wife’s statement, she reported that they have been together for 32 years and that, during that time, she does not recall him ever being completely pain free. She further reported witnessing his right knee swelling, accompanied by heat and redness, and stated that there have been times when the pain was so bad that he could not walk. Additionally, a former shipmate, P.M., recalled the Veteran injuring his right knee during service while they were docked in Bangkok, Thailand. P.M. stated that he remembers the Veteran’s right knee was swollen and that he complained of pain and difficulty walking. After seeing the ship’s Corpsman, the Veteran was put on medical restriction and not allowed to leave the ship, which P.M. stated he specifically remembers because the rest of the crew was allowed to go into Bangkok and the Veteran had to stay behind. In March 2019, the Veteran was afforded a VA examination. He reported that he experiences intermittent pain and swelling of his right knee. He stated that the symptoms began in 1972, while his ship was docked in Thailand. He saw the ship’s Corpsman for treatment and was told he likely had blood poisoning. He was given medication and put on medical restriction. He reports that he has continued to experience these symptoms since service. The examiner confirmed the diagnosis of gout and opined that his right knee disability was less likely than not incurred in, or caused by, the claimed in-service injury. The examiner explained that X rays taken many years after service showed the Veteran’s knee was normal and that his range of motion was decent for his age. The Board acknowledges that the March 2019 VA examiner opined that the Veteran’s right knee disability was less likely than not caused by, or a result of, his military service. While the Board cannot ignore or disregard the VA examiner’s medical conclusions, the Board is free to assess medical evidence and is not compelled to accept a medical opinion. See Willis v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 66 (1991); Wilson v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 614 (1992). Here, however, the examiner only considered the medical evidence of record and not lay evidence, regarding the history of the Veteran’s symptoms. The Veteran has consistently reported that his right knee disability symptoms began during service, in 1972, and he has provided further evidence in the form of buddy statements to support his claims. Thus, in rendering the negative nexus opinion, the examiner ignored the Veteran’s competent lay reports of the onset and history of his symptoms. Further, the examiner failed to provide an adequate rationale to support his opinion. As such, the Board affords the opinion minimal, if any, probative weight. In light of the above, the Board finds the Veteran’s competent, credible reports of right knee disability symptomatology to be more probative than the March 2019 VA examiner’s negative nexus opinion which did not consider all relevant evidence. The weight of the evidence supports a finding that the Veteran’s right knee disability symptoms onset in service and have continued since then. As such, service connection for a right knee disability is granted. THERESA M. CATINO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board C. Benson, 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.