Citation Nr: 22013697 Decision Date: 03/10/22 Archive Date: 03/10/22 DOCKET NO. 17-31 794 DATE: March 10, 2022 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for a back condition is denied. Entitlement to service connection for carpal tunnel syndrome, left wrist is denied. Entitlement to service connection for cubital tunnel syndrome is denied. Entitlement to service connection for a female reproductive condition is denied. Entitlement to service connection for a gall bladder condition is denied. Entitlement to service connection for a neck condition is denied. Entitlement to service connection for a right knee injury is denied. Entitlement to service connection for a sleep disorder is denied. Entitlement to service connection for right wrist tendonitis is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The evidence of record persuasively weighs against finding that any back condition began during active service, or is otherwise related to an in-service injury or disease. 2. The evidence of record persuasively weighs against finding that any left wrist carpal tunnel syndrome began during active service, or is otherwise related to an in-service injury or disease. 3. The evidence of record persuasively weighs against finding that any cubital tunnel syndrome began during active service, or is otherwise related to an in-service injury or disease. 4. The evidence of record persuasively weighs against finding that any female reproductive condition began during active service, or is otherwise related to an in-service injury or disease. 5. The evidence of record persuasively weighs against finding that any gallbladder condition began during active service, or is otherwise related to an in-service injury or disease. 6. The evidence of record persuasively weighs against finding that any neck condition began during active service, or is otherwise related to an in-service injury or disease. 7. The evidence of record persuasively weighs against finding that any right knee injury began during active service, or is otherwise related to an in-service injury or disease. 8. The evidence of record persuasively weighs against finding that any sleep disorder began during active service, or is otherwise related to an in-service injury or disease. 9. The evidence of record persuasively weighs against finding that right wrist tendonitis began during active service, or is otherwise related to an in-service injury or disease. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for service connection for a back condition are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. 2. The criteria for service connection for carpal tunnel syndrome, left wrist are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. 3. The criteria for service connection for cubital tunnel syndrome are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. 4. The criteria for service connection for female reproductive condition are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. 5. The criteria for service connection for gall bladder condition are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. 6. The criteria for service connection for a neck condition are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. 7. The criteria for service connection for a right knee injury are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. 8. The criteria for service connection for a sleep disorder are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. 9. The criteria for service connection for right wrist tendonitis are not 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 July 1985 to August 1985 in the United States Air Force. The Veteran testified at a September 2021 hearing before the undersigned. A transcript is associated with the record. Service Connection 1. Service connection for back condition. 2. Service connection for carpal tunnel syndrome, left wrist. 3. Service connection for cubital tunnel syndrome. 4. Service connection for female reproductive condition. 5. Service connection for gall bladder condition. 6. Service connection for neck condition. 7. Service connection for right knee injury. 8. Service connection for sleep disorder. 9. Service connection for right wrist tendonitis claimed as carpal tunnel and wrist injury The Veteran contends that her claimed disabilities are etiologically related to injuries sustained when carrying an industrial floor buffer up fire escape steps during active-duty service. Service connection may be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. The three-element test for service connection requires 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 in-service disease or injury. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166 -67 (Fed. Cir. 2004). The question for the Board is whether the Veteran has any current disabilities that began during service or are at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. The Board concludes that, while the Veteran may have diagnoses related to the conditions claimed above, the evidence of record persuasively weighs against finding that any of the claimed disabilities began during active service, or are otherwise related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. The only evidence of an in-service injury comes in the form of lay statements by the Veteran, to include during testimony before the undersigned. The Veteran's contention is that a single incident resulted in all of the claimed conditions. The Board notes that the Veteran is competent to report that she injured herself carrying an "industrial floor buffer" up fire escape stairs during her active-duty period, but finds her reports are largely not credible due to internal inconsistency and inconsistency with other evidence in the record. See Buchanan v. Nicholson, 451 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2006). Specifically, the Veteran asserts that she was not permitted to go to medical following the claimed injury, that she was never placed on physical profile during active duty, and that she did not go before any Medical Board prior to her discharge because she was told "it was cancelled." Furthermore, she explains her signature on any records related to such proceedings as the result of signing paperwork during out-processing. She also argues, through her representative, that any physical profile records were added to her record after she was separated from the Air Force. The Veteran's service treatment records (STRs) clearly document the results of the Medical Board, finding that the Veteran was unfit for service due to preexisting chronic pelvic pain, and the medical records the Veteran alleges were added following her separation were explicitly referenced by the Medical Board. The Board notes that neither the Veteran, nor her representative, has advanced any additional evidence or explanation in support of their argument, other than statements alluding to pending evidence associated with a separate claim related to military sexual trauma. Review of the claims files shows no such evidence. As stated above the STRs document treatment for at least one condition the Veteran alleges is attributable to her injury despite stating she was never seen by medical, and these records document the issue as having existed prior to service. Thus, any assertions that she may make as to onset during service are not supported by the objective evidence of record. The Board's finding that the Veteran is not credible as to her assertions of the injury and subsequent treatment in service is based on the presence of contemporaneous STRs that contradict those assertions, as opposed to the absence of evidence that the injury occurred. Buchanan, 451 F.3d at 1334; Fountain v. Shinseki, 27 Vet. App. 258 (2015). While the Veteran believes her claimed disabilities are related to the incident with the floor buffer, the Board reiterates that the evidence of record persuasively weighs against findings that the claimed injuries associated with this incident occurred. M.E. Larkin Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board P.S. McLeod 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.