Citation Nr: A26041018 Decision Date: 04/30/26 Archive Date: 04/30/26 DOCKET NO. 250527-547368 DATE: April 30, 2026 ORDER Service connection for overactive bladder is denied. Service connection for plantar fasciitis and hallux valgus, bilateral feet (claimed as bilateral foot condition) is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The evidence of record persuasively weighs against finding that overactive bladder 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 plantar fasciitis and hallux valgus, bilateral feet, 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 overactive bladder have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. 2. The criteria for service connection for plantar fasciitis and hallux valgus, bilateral feet (claimed as bilateral foot condition) have not 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 honorably on active duty in the United States Air Force from March 1983 to April 1988. The rating decision on appeal was issued in April 2025 and constitutes an initial decision; therefore, the modernized review system, also known as the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA), applies. In May 2025 VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement), the Veteran elected the Direct Review docket. Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the April 2025 agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) decision on appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.301. Any evidence submitted after the AOJ decision on appeal cannot be considered by the Board. 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.300, 20.301, 20.801. If the Veteran would like VA to consider any evidence that was submitted that the Board could not consider, the Veteran may file a Supplemental Claim (VA Form 20-0995) and submit or identify this evidence. 38 C.F.R. § 3.2501. If the evidence is new and relevant, VA will issue another decision on the claims, considering the new evidence in addition to the evidence previously considered. Id. Specific instructions for filing a Supplemental Claim are included with this decision. Service Connection Service connection will be granted if it is shown that the Veteran suffers from a disability resulting from personal injury suffered or disease contracted in the line of duty, or for aggravation during active service of a preexisting injury or disease. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Disorders diagnosed after discharge will still be service connected if all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d); see also Combee v. Brown, 34 F.3d 1039, 1043. To establish service connection, there must be a competent diagnosis of a current disability; medical or, in certain cases, lay evidence of in-service occurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and competent evidence of a nexus between an in-service injury or disease and the current disability. Hickson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 247, 252; see Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372. Competent medical evidence is evidence provided by a person who is qualified through education, training, or experience to offer medical diagnoses, statements, or opinions. Competent medical evidence may also include statements conveying sound medical principles found in medical treatises. It also includes statements contained in authoritative writings, such as medical and scientific articles and research reports or analyses. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(a)(1). Competent lay evidence is any evidence not requiring that the proponent have specialized education, training, or experience. Lay evidence is competent if it is provided by a person who has knowledge of facts or circumstances and conveys matters that can be observed and described by a lay person. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(a)(2). This may include some medical matters, such as describing symptoms or relating a contemporaneous medical diagnosis. Jandreau, 492 F.3d 1372. In determining whether service connection is warranted for a disability, VA is responsible for determining whether the evidence supports the claim or is "nearly equal" or in approximate balance, with the Veteran prevailing in either event, or whether most of the evidence is against the claim, in which case the claim is denied. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; Lynch v. McDonough, 21 F.4th 776. 1. Service connection for overactive bladder is denied. The Veteran contends that overactive bladder began in 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. 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 concludes that, while the Veteran has a diagnosis of overactive bladder, diagnosed in 2024, the evidence of record persuasively weighs against finding that it began during active service, or is otherwise related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. Review of service treatment records (STR) finds no complaints or treatment for overactive bladder. The Veteran asserts that overactive bladder began in service due to having to wait regularly for someone to relieve him of his policing duties for hours after asking for bathroom breaks. The Veteran believes that having to hold his bladder for hours repeatedly over the years caused anxiety about accidental urination and resulted in his overactive bladder. Service treatment records show the Veteran had multiple sick call visits for genitourinary complaints; no complaints of overactive bladder are seen. A March 1985 periodic examination report is negative for genitourinary complaints or related clinical findings. In the STRs after active duty there are Reports of Medical History and Reports of Medical Examination dated in May 1988 with February 1992, April 1992, August 1993, and June 1988 where the Veteran checked boxes denying any GU (bladder) problems and where examiners found normal GU system. These multiple examination and medical history reports following air service contradict the Veteran's claim that bladder problems started in service. Review of CAPRI records in the file after release from active duty show no reports, complaints, or treatment for overactive bladder for years following service until the current claim decades later in December 2024. The January 2025 VA examiner opined that the Veteran's overactive bladder is less likely than not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. The VA examiner considered the Veteran's statement that bladder issues began in service due to having to hold urine repeatedly for long periods while on duty. After reviewing the file, the VA examiner concluded that Veteran's overactive bladder is not related to service on the basis that this condition was not shown or complained of in service. The Board observes that there were no complaints in service or following service for many years. While the Veteran is competent to report that he noticed bladder urgency or related discomfort starting in service, these reports are largely not credible due to internal inconsistency and inconsistency with other evidence in the contemporaneous service health records. Buchanan v. Nicholson, 451 F.3d 1331, 1336-37. Further, while the Veteran believes his current overactive bladder is related to being forced to regularly delay urinating during active duty service, as a lay person he is not competent to provide a nexus opinion on a complex medical question. He has not shown that he is otherwise qualified to render such an opinion through medical training, education, or expertise. There is no objective medical, or credible lay, evidence to support the Veteran's claim. The cumulative evidence of record - including the Veteran's active duty service treatment records, the service medical history reports following active air service and after military service, as well as the VA examination report - against finding that active duty service onset occurred for overactive bladder. For this reason, service connection for overactive bladder is denied. 2. Service connection for plantar fasciitis and hallux valgus, bilateral feet (claimed as bilateral foot condition) is denied. The Veteran contends that feet problems began in 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. 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 concludes that, while the Veteran has a diagnosis of plantar fasciitis and hallux valgus, the evidence of record persuasively weighs against finding that they began during active service, or are otherwise related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. The first requirement for service connection is satisfied. The file contains a January 2025 VA foot examination report that diagnosed bilateral plantar fasciitis and hallux valgus with a diagnosis date of 2024. Review of service treatment records shows no complaints or treatment for a foot condition while in service. In fact, examination reports in May 1988 STR reveal that the Veteran denied any foot issues on multiple occasions. A June 1988 report of medical examination was completed after the Veteran's active duty service ended. The examiner checked the box for normal feet. In a June 1988 report of medical history, the Veteran checked the box for no foot trouble. In February 1994 medical certificate, the Veteran says to the best of his knowledge, he has no medical defect, disease, or disability which would disqualify him for full military duty. In August 1993 annual medical certificate, he checks the box that says he currently has no medical or dental problems. In April 1992 report of examination, the examiner checked a box indicating the Veteran's feet were normal. These examinations and reports of medical history contradict the Veteran's December 2024 application statement that wearing combat boots daily in air service including running and walking during physical training caused swelling, corns, bunions, and heel pain in service caused his current foot problems. The January 2025 VA examiner opined that the Veteran's bilateral foot condition is less likely than not (likelihood is less than approximately balanced or nearly equal) incurred in or caused by the claimed in-service injury, event, or illness. The VA examiner explained that although literature support the development of diagnosed conditions due to ill-fitting footwear and physical activities associated with military service, like running or standing for long periods in military boots, there is nothing in STR to support that being the case here. Therefore, the Veteran's combat boot related pain and discomfort was less likely than not the cause of the Veteran's currently diagnosed plantar fasciitis and hallux valgus decades later. While the Veteran is competent to report that the current foot conditions started in service, these reports are largely not credible due to internal inconsistency and inconsistency with other contemporaneous evidence in the record. Buchanan v. Nicholson, 451 F.3d 1331, 1336-37. While the Veteran believes the claimed bilateral plantar fasciitis and hallux valgus are related to in-service injury or events, the Board reiterates that the evidence of record persuasively weighs against findings that in-service incurrence occurred or that the current conditions are linked to service. D. JOHNSON Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Black 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.