Citation Nr: 21039936 Decision Date: 07/01/21 Archive Date: 07/01/21 DOCKET NO. 17-56 211 DATE: July 1, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for a left ankle disorder is granted. Entitlement to service connection for a right ankle disorder is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Resolving all reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, his left ankle disorder, is at least likely as not related to active duty service. 2. Resolving all reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, his right ankle disorder, is at least likely as not related to active duty service. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for a left ankle disorder, have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. 2. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for a right ankle disorder, have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from May 2012 to May 2016. The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans' Law Judge at a Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) hearing in March 2021. A transcript of the hearing is of record. Service Connection The law provides that service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active military service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304. Service connection may be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (d). Generally, establishing service connection requires medical or, in certain circumstances, lay evidence of (1) a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the present disability. See Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313, 1316 (Fed. Cir. 2009); Hickson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 247, 253 (1999). 1. Entitlement to service connection for a left ankle disorder 2. Entitlement to service connection for a right ankle disorder The Veteran is seeking service connection for left and right ankle disorders. He specifically claims that he twisted his ankles while training at Fort Campbell in Kentucky. The Veteran has a current diagnosis of lateral collateral ligament strain in both the right and left ankles. After a review of the evidence of record, the Board finds that service connection is warranted for both the right and left ankle disorders. The Veteran's service treatment records are silent for any signs, symptoms, diagnoses, or treatment for ankle disorders of either side. However, the Veteran provided testimony and statements in which he noted that when he injured his ankle he was attached to a medical unit and those personnel treated his injury. He also stated that this was a regular occurrence so that he didn't have to go to sick bay for what he considered "non-emergencies" and could receive prompt treatment. He indicated that they provided him with ace bandages and ointments, and told him to take it easy for a day or two. He reported symptoms of swelling and sprains due to ankle injuries while training. The Veteran was afforded a VA examination in June 2017. At that time, the examiner endorsed a diagnosis of bilateral lateral collateral ligament strain with an onset date of 2012. The Veteran stated that his ankles pop when he runs and that it's worse when he wears boots, flare-ups were not endorsed. He was noted to have abnormal range of motion in both ankles without pain with weight-bearing or evidence of crepitus. The examiner found no instability or ankylosis upon examination. The examiner opined that the Veteran's ankle disorders did not seem to be related to service (50 percent probability) citing the lack of documented treatment in his service records. The Veteran's post service medical records indicate complaints of ankle pain since at least October 2017. However, there are also medical treatment notes, including from April 2018, that indicate that the Veteran's ankles were found to be normal. These records also include the Veteran's statements regarding ankle pain and subjective feelings of ankle instability. The Board has also considered the Veteran's statements regarding his left and right ankle disorders and finds them credible in making its determination. A lay witness is competent to testify as to the occurrence of an in-service injury or incident where such issue is factual in nature. Grottveit v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 91, 93 (1993). This includes the Veteran's recitation of his ankle injuries in service, as well as the subjective symptoms that he has sought treatment for since active duty service. Taking all the evidence of record into account, the Board finds that the positive and negative evidence sits in relative equipoise and service connection for left and right ankle disorders is warranted. While the April 2017 VA examiner opined that the Veteran's ankle disorders were less likely than not related to active duty service, their opinion included some equivocation and was not entirely dismissive of the possibility save for the lack of documented in-service treatment for any ankle disorders. The Veteran's credible statements regarding his ankle disorders are persuasive in finding that despite the lack of documented in-service treatment for his ankles, that he did in fact injure them and received treatment from fellow soldiers for conditions that he deemed as "non-emergencies". Additionally, his post service medical records indicate that he has reported ankle symptoms for almost as long as his time since leaving active duty service. Accordingly, service connection should be granted ot the Veteran for his left and right ankle disorders. Under the benefit of the doubt standard established by Congress, when the evidence is in relative equipoise, the law dictates the Veteran prevails. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107; Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. As such, the claim is granted. 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. B.T. KNOPE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Q. Hernan, Attorney Advisor