Case A26037229

DELYVONNE M. WHITEHEAD · 2026 · Case ID: A26037229

MIXED

Summary

The Veteran served in the United States Army from December 2002 to February 2004. The Veteran appeals the denial of service connection for several conditions, including a left shoulder disability, left and right sinus tarsi syndrome disorders, left and right ankle conditions, restrictive lung disease, lumbosacral strain, bilateral knee conditions, bilateral metatarsalgia, bilateral plantar fasciitis, and left and right shin splints. During the appeal process, the Veteran withdrew claims for the left shoulder disability, left and right sinus tarsi syndrome disorders, and left and right ankle conditions, leading to their dismissal. The Board granted service connection for restrictive lung disease, lumbosacral strain, bilateral knee strain, bilateral metatarsalgia, and bilateral plantar fasciitis. The Veteran's restrictive lung disease was granted based on it being a medically unexplained chronic multi-symptom illness (MUCMI) qualifying under Persian Gulf War presumptions, with the Board crediting lay statements regarding symptom onset and exposure to burn pits in Kuwait. For the lumbosacral strain, bilateral knee strain, bilateral metatarsalgia, and bilateral plantar fasciitis, the Board granted service connection, finding that while VA examiners opined these conditions were less likely than not related to service, the Veteran's lay testimony and a fellow servicemember's statement provided credible evidence of in-service trauma and heavy lifting, which the Board credited to establish the nexus. Service connection for left and right shin splints was denied, as the evidence did not demonstrate a current disability or sufficient nexus to service, with VA examinations noting the condition had resolved and treatment records being negative.

Service Branch

ARMY

Special Benefit

NO SPECIAL BENEFIT

Docket No.

201112-120994

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: A26037229
Decision Date: 04/21/26 Archive Date: 04/21/26

DOCKET NO. 201112-120994
DATE: April 21, 2026

ORDER

The appeal as to the claim of entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder disability has been withdrawn and is thus dismissed.

The appeal as to the claim of entitlement to service connection for a left sinus tarsi syndrome disorder has been withdrawn and is thus dismissed.

The appeal as to the claim of entitlement to service connection for a right sinus tarsi syndrome disorder has been withdrawn and is thus dismissed.

The appeal as to the claim of entitlement to service connection for a left ankle condition has been withdrawn and is thus dismissed.

The appeal as to the claim of entitlement to service connection for a right ankle condition has been withdrawn and is thus dismissed.

Service connection for restrictive lung disease is granted.

Service connection for a lumbosacral strain condition is granted.

Service connection for a left knee condition is granted.

Service connection for a right knee condition is granted.

Service connection for a bilateral metatarsalgia condition is granted.

Service connection for a bilateral plantar fasciitis condition is granted.

Service connection for a left shin splints condition is denied.

Service connection for a right shin splints condition is denied.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. In September 2024, at the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) hearing, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Veteran, while accompanied by his representative, withdrew his appeal as to the issue of entitlement service connection for a left shoulder disability.

2. In September 2024, at the Board hearing, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Veteran, while accompanied by his representative, withdrew his appeal as to the issue of entitlement service connection for a left sinus tarsi syndrome disorder.

3. In September 2024, at the Board hearing, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Veteran, while accompanied by his representative, withdrew his appeal as to the issue of entitlement service connection for a right sinus tarsi syndrome disorder.

4. In September 2024, at the Board hearing, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Veteran, while accompanied by his representative, withdrew his appeal as to the issue of entitlement service connection for a left ankle condition.

5. In September 2024, at the Board hearing, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Veteran, while accompanied by his representative, withdrew his appeal as to the issue of entitlement service connection for a right ankle condition.

6. The Veteran's restrictive lung disease is a diagnosed illness of an unknown etiology.

7. The probative evidence weighs in favor of a finding that the Veteran's lumbar spine condition began in or is related to service.

8. The probative evidence weighs in favor of a finding that the Veteran's left knee condition began in or is related to service.

9. The probative evidence weighs in favor of a finding that the Veteran's right knee condition began in or is related to service.

10. The probative evidence weighs in favor of a finding that the Veteran's bilateral metatarsalgia condition began in or is related to service.

11. The probative evidence weighs in favor of a finding that the Veteran's bilateral plantar fasciitis condition began in or is related to service

12. The persuasive evidence of record is against a finding that the Veteran has a current left shin splints condition that is related to service.

13. The persuasive evidence of record is against a finding that the Veteran has a current right shin splints condition that is related to service.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal as to the claim for service connection of left shoulder disability by the appellant have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205.

2. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal as to the claim for service connection of left sinus tarsi syndrome disorder by the appellant have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205.

3. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal as to the claim for service connection of right sinus tarsi syndrome disorder by the appellant have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205.

4. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal as to the claim for service connection of left ankle condition by the appellant have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105;

2. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal as to the claim for service connection of left sinus tarsi syndrome disorder by the appellant have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205.

3. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal as to the claim for service connection of right sinus tarsi syndrome disorder by the appellant have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205.

4. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal as to the claim for service connection of left ankle condition by the appellant have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205.

5. The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal as to the claim for service connection of right ankle condition by the appellant have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205.

6. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for restrictive lung disease have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1117; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.317.

7. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for a lumbar spine condition have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303.

8. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for a left knee condition have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303.

9. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for a right knee condition have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303.

10. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for a bilateral metatarsalgia condition have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303.

11. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for a bilateral plantar fasciitis condition have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303.

12. The criteria for service connection for a left shin splints condition have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303.

13. The criteria for service connection for a right shin splints 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 on active duty in the United States Army from December 2002 to February 2004.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a September 2020 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In October 2020, the Veteran filed a Request for a Higher Level Review of the December 2020 rating decision. In an October 2020 Higher Level Review rating decision, the RO continued the denial of the claim. In November 2020, the Veteran perfected appeal to the Board by filing a VA Form 10182 Notice of Disagreement (NOD), selecting the Hearing Lane. By choosing the Hearing Lane, the Veteran opted for the opportunity to testify at a personal hearing before the Board and submit additional evidence within 90 days of the hearing. In September 2024, a hearing was held before a Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of the hearing has been associated with the file. In deciding the appeal, the Board may only consider the evidence of record in September 2020 along with that submitted within 90 days of the September 2024 Board hearing.

1. The appeal as to the claim of entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder disability has been withdrawn and is thus dismissed.

2. The appeal as to the claim of entitlement to service connection for a left sinus tarsi syndrome disorder has been withdrawn and is thus dismissed.

3. The appeal as to the claim of entitlement to service connection for a right sinus tarsi syndrome disorder has been withdrawn and is thus dismissed.

4, a hearing was held before a Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of the hearing has been associated with the file. In deciding the appeal, the Board may only consider the evidence of record in September 2020 along with that submitted within 90 days of the September 2024 Board hearing.

1. The appeal as to the claim of entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder disability has been withdrawn and is thus dismissed.

2. The appeal as to the claim of entitlement to service connection for a left sinus tarsi syndrome disorder has been withdrawn and is thus dismissed.

3. The appeal as to the claim of entitlement to service connection for a right sinus tarsi syndrome disorder has been withdrawn and is thus dismissed.

4. The appeal as to the claim of entitlement to service connection for a left ankle condition has been withdrawn and is thus dismissed.

5. The appeal as to the claim of entitlement to service connection for a right ankle condition has been withdrawn and is thus dismissed.

In September 2024, at the Board video hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Veteran, while accompanied by his representative, withdrew his appeal as to the issues of entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder disability, left sinus tarsi syndrome disorder, right sinus tarsi syndrome disorder, left ankle condition and a right ankle condition while on the record.

Accordingly, the Board may dismiss any appeal which fails to allege specific error of fact or law in the determination being appealed. 38 U.S.C. § 7105. An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal at any time before the Board promulgates a decision. 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. Withdrawal may be made by the appellant or by his or her authorized representative. Id. In the present case, while accompanied by his representative, the Board received the Veteran's oral statement withdrawing his appeal as to the issues of entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder disability, left sinus tarsi syndrome disorder, right sinus tarsi syndrome disorder, left ankle condition and a right ankle condition while at the October 2024 Board hearing while on the record. The Veteran has thus withdrawn the appeal as to these issues and, hence, there remain no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration as to the appeal of the issues of entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder disability, left sinus tarsi syndrome disorder, right sinus tarsi syndrome disorder, left ankle condition and a right ankle condition.

Hence, here, there remain no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration. Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the appeal as to these issues above and the appeal as to these issues is dismissed.

Service Connection

The Veteran seeks entitlement to service connection for a respiratory condition, including residuals, inhalation injury condition, a lumbosacral condition, a foot condition, including metatarsalgia, a left knee condition and a right knee condition.

The Board notes that service connection may be established for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a).

In order to establish service connection for a claimed disability on a direct basis, there must be competent evidence of (1) a current disability; (2) an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the current disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service. See Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166-67 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

Service connection may also be established by evidencing a chronic disease in service, which requires a combination of manifestations sufficient to identify the disease entity and sufficient observation to establish chronicity at the time. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b). If chronicity in service is not established, a showing of continuity of symptoms after discharge is required. Id. The provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b) pertaining to continuity of symptomatology can be applied only in cases involving those conditions explicitly recognized under 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a). Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2013).

Service connection may also be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when the evidence establishes the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d).

Service connection may be warranted for a Persian Gulf Veteran who exhibits objective indications of a qualifying chronic disability that became manifest during active
of continuity of symptoms after discharge is required. Id. The provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b) pertaining to continuity of symptomatology can be applied only in cases involving those conditions explicitly recognized under 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a). Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2013).

Service connection may also be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when the evidence establishes the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d).

Service connection may be warranted for a Persian Gulf Veteran who exhibits objective indications of a qualifying chronic disability that became manifest during active military, naval or air service in the Southwest Asia theater of operations during the Persian Gulf War. The term Southwest Asia theater of operations means Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, the neutral zone between Iraq and Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, the Gulf of Aden, the Gulf of Oman, the Persian Gulf, the Arabian Sea, the Red Sea, and the airspace above these locations, as defined in 38 C.F.R. §?3.317(e)(2). 38 C.F.R. §?3.320.

The term Persian Gulf War means August 2, 1990, through date to be prescribed by Presidential proclamation or law, as defined in §?38 C.F.R. 3.2(i). 38 C.F.R. §?3.320.

For purposes of 38 C.F.R. § 3.317, there are three types of qualifying chronic disabilities: (1) an undiagnosed illness; (2) a medically unexplained chronic multi-symptom illness (MUCMI); and (3) a diagnosed illness that the Secretary determines in regulations prescribed under 38 U.S.C. § 1117(d) warrants a presumption of service connection.

An undiagnosed illness is defined as a condition that by history, physical examination and laboratory tests cannot be attributed to a known clinical diagnosis. There must also be objective indications of chronic disability, which include both "signs," in the medical sense of objective evidence perceptible to an examining physician, and other, non-medical indicators that are capable of independent verification. 38 C.F.R. § 3.317(a)(3). Signs or symptoms which may be manifestations of an undiagnosed illness include fatigue, muscle pain, joint pain, sleep disturbance, and neuropsychological signs and symptoms. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.317(b). Disabilities that have existed for 6 months or more and disabilities that exhibit intermittent episodes of improvement and worsening over a 6-month period will be considered chronic. The 6-month period of chronicity will be measured from the earliest date on which the pertinent evidence establishes that the signs or symptoms of the disability first became manifest. 38 C.F.R. § 3.317(a)(4).

In the case of claims based on undiagnosed illness, there is no requirement that there be competent evidence of a nexus between the claimed illness and service. 38 U.S.C. § 1117; Gutierrez v. Principi, 19 Vet. App. 1, 8-9 (2004); 38 C.F.R. § 3.317. Further, laypersons are competent to report objective signs of illness. Id.

A MUCMI is one defined by a cluster of signs or symptoms and specifically includes chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia, and functional gastrointestinal disorders (excluding structural gastrointestinal diseases), as well as any other illness that the Secretary determines meets the criteria in paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this section for a medically unexplained chronic multi-symptom illness. It means a diagnosed illness without conclusive pathophysiology or etiology that is characterized by overlapping symptoms and signs and has features such as fatigue, pain, disability out of proportion to physical findings, and inconsistent demonstration of laboratory abnormalities. A chronic multi-symptom illness will not be considered medically unexplained when both the etiology and the pathophysiology of the illness is partially understood. 38 C.F.R. § 3.317(a)(2)(ii). The determination of whether the illness is medically unexplained is particular to the individual veteran in each case. See Stewart v. Wilkie, 30 Vet. App. 383, 391 (2018).

In addition, service connection may be granted on a presumptive basis for a Persian Gulf War veteran with a chronic disease associated with exposure to particulate matter during a qualifying period of service. See 38 U.S.C. § 1117; 38 C.F.R.
A chronic multi-symptom illness will not be considered medically unexplained when both the etiology and the pathophysiology of the illness is partially understood. 38 C.F.R. § 3.317(a)(2)(ii). The determination of whether the illness is medically unexplained is particular to the individual veteran in each case. See Stewart v. Wilkie, 30 Vet. App. 383, 391 (2018).

In addition, service connection may be granted on a presumptive basis for a Persian Gulf War veteran with a chronic disease associated with exposure to particulate matter during a qualifying period of service. See 38 U.S.C. § 1117; 38 C.F.R. § 3.320; 88 Fed. Reg. 60336, 60337 (Sept. 1, 2023). On August 5, 2021, VA codified the presumption of exposure to fine particulate matter for asthma, rhinitis, sinusitis and rare cancers in 38 C.F.R. § 3.320.

The Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics (PACT) Act, was enacted on August 10, 2022. Section 405 of the PACT Act reduced the threshold for establishing eligibility when considering presumptive service connection for Persian Gulf War veterans. 38 C.F.R. § 3.317.

This new law expands VA health care and benefits for veterans exposed to burn pits or other toxic substances during military service. The PACT Act lists several diseases or illnesses that can be considered presumptively service-connected if a veteran was exposed to burn pits or other toxic substances during Gulf War. Veterans who were exposed to burn pits and other toxins (BPOT) specifically during the Gulf War eras are eligible for presumptive service connection if they have a current disability diagnosed as chronic rhinitis, chronic sinusitis, constrictive bronchiolitis or obliterative bronchiolitis, emphysema, granulomatous disease, interstitial lung disease (ILD), pleuritis, pulmonary fibrosis, sarcoidosis, chronic bronchitis, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). See PACT Act, Pub. L. No. 117-168 § 3373, 136 Stat. 1759 (2022).

The PACT Act further provides that, when a veteran submits a claim for compensation with evidence of a disability that is not considered for presumptive service connection and there is evidence of a TERA during active military service and such evidence is not sufficient to establish service connection for the disability, VA shall provide the veteran with a medical examination under 38 U.S.C. § 5103A(d) and obtain a medical opinion as to whether there is a nexus between the disability and the toxic exposure risk activity. See 38 U.S.C. § 1168.

VA shall ensure that any determination made on or after the date of the enactment of the PACT Act, enacted August 10, 2022, regarding a presumption of service connection based on a toxic exposure is made pursuant to 38 U.S.C. §§ 1171 et seq. 38 U.S.C. § 1118.

In the context of the PACT Act, the earliest possible effective date for a service connection claim is August 10, 2022, the date the PACT Act was enacted.

VA shall consider all information lay and medical evidence of record in a case and when there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, VA shall give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 53 (1990). To deny a claim on its merits, there must be a showing that the evidence is not in approximate balance and is persuasively against the Veteran's claim. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); Lynch v. McDonough, 21 F. 4th 776, 781 (Fed. Cir. 2021).

6. Service connection for restrictive lung disease is granted.

In review of the evidence of record, the Veteran's service records reflect that the February 2000 report of medical examination for enlistment into the Army Reserves reflects normal findings upon clinical evaluation, including a normal arch of the feet. The accompanying February 2000 report of medical history for enlistment into the Army Reserve notes the Veteran's report of good health. The February 2003 pre-deployment health assessment notes the Veteran's report of very good health. A March 2003 service treatment record (STR) notes the Veteran's report of a sore throat, sneezing, stuffy nose, running nose, migraine headache and rashes. An October 2003 STR notes the Veteran's report of vomit and fatigue. The January 2004 post deployment health assessment reflects the Veteran's report of back pain, muscle aches, skin diseases or rashes, still feeling tired after sleeping and vomiting.

December 2022 and January 2023 VA toxic exposure risk activities (TERA) memorandum concede that the Veteran is a Veteran covered under 38 U.S.C. §1117 and 38 U.S.C. §1119. Accordingly, the Veteran qualifies as a Persian Gulf war Veteran.

Post service records reflect that the Veteran underwent a VA respiratory conditions (other than tuberculosis and sleep apnea) examination in August 2020, at which time a diagnosis of restrictive lung disease was rendered. The examiner noted a date of onset of 2004, as the Veteran reported that he developed frequent shortness of breath in Kuwait. The examiner found that the diagnosed restrictive lung disease is with unknown etiology. The examiner opined that the Veteran's disability pattern is a diagnosable but medically unexplained chronic multi-symptom illness of unknown etiology.

In a statement received in the September 2024 applicable evidentiary review window, former servicemember D.Y.C. stated that he was deployed to Kuwait with the Veteran. D.Y.C. explained that they were exposed and breathed in smoke and fumes from the burn pits that contained chemicals, sand, dust and particulate matter.

After a review of the evidence, the evidence establishes that the Veteran has been diagnosed with restrictive lung disease, as reflected in the August 2020 VA respiratory conditions examination, and that he is a Persian Gulf War Veteran.

The VA examiner found that the diagnosed restrictive lung disease is with unknown etiology and opined that the Veteran's disability pattern is a diagnosable but medically unexplained chronic multi-symptom illness of unknown etiology. As the etiology of the Veteran's restrictive lung disease is unknown, his condition is a MUCMI, which is a qualifying chronic disability. 38 U.S.C. § 1117(a); 38 C.F.R. § 3.317(a)(1).

Accordingly, upon review of the evidence and for the reasons set forth below, the Board finds that the Veteran's restrictive lung disease disability is a MUCMI as defined in 38 C.F.R. § 3.317(a)(2)(ii) and, thus, is a qualifying chronic disability for the purposes of 38 C.F.R. § 3.317 as found by the VA examiner.

The Board finds that the Veteran's statements, include frequent shortness of breath in service while deployed to Kuwait, as to the onset of his disability are credible and concludes that the lay symptoms as to the Veteran's restrictive lung disease became manifest during active service in Kuwait.

As such, service connection for restrictive lung disease is granted. 38 C.F.R. § 3.317.

7. Service connection for a lumbosacral strain condition is granted.

8. Service connection for a left knee condition is granted.

9. Service connection for a right knee condition is granted.

10. Service connection for a bilateral metatarsalgia condition is granted.

11. Service connection for a bilateral plantar fasciitis condition is granted.

With reference and incorporation to the record of evidence discussed above, the record reflects that the January 2004 post deployment health assessment reflects the Veteran's report of back pain, muscle aches, skin diseases or rashes, still feeling tired after sleeping and vomiting.

11. Service connection for a bilateral plantar fasciitis condition is granted.

The Veteran underwent a VA back (thoracolumbar spine) conditions examination in August 2020, at which time a diagnosis of lumbosacral strain. The examiner noted that the condition began in 2004, while the Veteran was in Kuwait where he developed back pain from heavy lifting. The Veteran reported that the condition has stayed the same, with current symptoms of throbbing pain in the low back. The examiner found that the diagnosed lumbosacral strain condition is a condition with a clear and specific etiology and diagnosis. The examiner opined that the diagnosed lumbosacral strain condition is less likely than not incurred in and/or caused by the claimed in-service injury, event, or illness related to a specific exposure event experienced by the Veteran during service in Southwest Asia. The examiner rationalized that lumbosacral strain is typically caused by trauma.

The Veteran underwent a VA knee and lower leg conditions examination in August 2020, at which time a diagnosis of bilateral knee strain was confirmed. The examiner noted a date of onset of 2002, as the Veteran reported that while in Kuwait, he developed bilateral knee pain and shin splints from physical training. A diagnosis of shin splints was not confirmed. The Veteran reported that the knee pain has stayed the same, with current symptoms of throbbing pain in both knees. The examiner noted that the shin splints have resolved. The examiner found that the diagnosed bilateral knee strain condition is a condition with a clear and specific etiology and diagnosis. The examiner opined that the diagnosed bilateral knee strain condition is less likely than not incurred in and/or caused by the claimed in-service injury, event, or illness related to a specific exposure event experienced by the Veteran during service in Southwest Asia. The examiner rationalized that knee strain is typically caused by trauma.

The Veteran underwent a VA foot conditions examination in August 2020, at which time diagnoses of bilateral metatarsalgia and bilateral plantar fasciitis were rendered. The examiner noted a date of onset of 2004. The Veteran explained that he developed bilateral feet pain from physical training. The Veteran reported that the condition has stayed the same with current symptoms of throbbing pain in both feet. The examiner found that the diagnosed metatarsalgia and plantar fasciitis are conditions with clear and specific etiology and diagnosis. The examiner opined that the diagnosed metatarsalgia and plantar fasciitis conditions were less likely than not incurred in and/or caused by the claimed in-service injury, event, or illness related to a specific exposure event experienced by the Veteran during service in Southwest Asia. The examiner rationalized that metatarsalgia and plantar fasciitis are typically caused by overuse.

At the September 2024 Board hearing, the Veteran provided testimony as to his responsibilities in service and symptoms as to his shins, back, knees, feet and joints.

In the September 2024 statement, D.Y.C. stated that they had to operate heavy machinery which included heavy lifting of items from shipping containers without a back brace. D.Y.C. described an event where a scud missile flew over the Veteran's head and the Veteran jumped off a 10 to 15 feet tower to unlevel ground with sandbags and took cover in a bunker. D.Y.C. stated that the Veteran mentioned that his foot was in pain and aggravated from the fall from the guard tower and to this day, he can see him not walking the same. D.Y.C. said that the Veteran's shins, knees and lower back have been in pain as well.

Here, although the Veteran's report of medical examination and report of medical history at his time of active duty are not of record, the Veteran's Army Reserves reports upon enlistment do not reflect any conditions regarding the lumbar spine, knees or feet upon enlistment. However, the record establishes that after deployment, the Veteran complained of back pain, muscle aches, skin diseases or rashes, still feeling tired after sleeping and vomiting. The Board notes that at the time of the August 2020 VA examinations, the Veteran reported that his claimed lumbar spine and foot conditions manifested in service in Kuwait when he performed physical training and heavy lifting.

The Board may consider many factors when assessing the credibility and weight of lay evidence, including statements made during treatment, self-interest or bias
examination and report of medical history at his time of active duty are not of record, the Veteran's Army Reserves reports upon enlistment do not reflect any conditions regarding the lumbar spine, knees or feet upon enlistment. However, the record establishes that after deployment, the Veteran complained of back pain, muscle aches, skin diseases or rashes, still feeling tired after sleeping and vomiting. The Board notes that at the time of the August 2020 VA examinations, the Veteran reported that his claimed lumbar spine and foot conditions manifested in service in Kuwait when he performed physical training and heavy lifting.

The Board may consider many factors when assessing the credibility and weight of lay evidence, including statements made during treatment, self-interest or bias, internal consistency, and consistency with other evidence. Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498, 512 (1995), aff'd, 78 F.3d 604 (Fed. Cir. 1996). This may include some medical matters, such as describing symptoms or relating a contemporaneous medical diagnosis. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007); Kahana v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 428, 435 (2011).

In this regard, the August 2020 VA examiner opined that the Veteran's claimed lumbar spine, knees and foot conditions are related to overuse and trauma. The lay statements of record, including the Veteran's and D.Y.C.'s, consistently reflect that reported heavy lifting, jumping and landing on uneven ground in service. The Board thus credits the lay statements of record in this regard to note that an event or incident in service.

Thus, the first two Shedden elements have been satisfied for the claimed issues of a lumbar spine condition, metatarsalgia and the diagnosed plantar fasciitis conditions.

Accordingly, the Board has credited the lay statements of record to find that the element of an in-service event, here, heavy lifting, jumping and landing on uneven ground. The Board finds that the foundation is laid for the possibility that the examiner's findings that the Veteran's diagnosed lumbosacral strain, bilateral knee strain, bilateral metatarsalgia and bilateral plantar fasciitis which resulted from overuse and trauma are related to the Veteran's heavy lifting, jumping and landing on uneven ground on service. While the Board cannot make such a professional medical connection, here exists the introduction of the possibility of the element of the condition being directly related to service.

Although the record is void of an overabundance of contemporaneous treatment record from separation until current, the record indeed reflects that the Veteran reported back pain, muscle aches, skin diseases or rashes, still feeling tired after sleeping and vomiting upon his January 2004 post deployment. The Veteran has also reported that the symptoms he described in service have stayed the same since service and the VA examiner above found that these conditions to be current. The lay statements of record thus may corroborate indications of continued pain since service in the absence of contemporaneous medical records. Furthermore, the Board may not reject as not credible any uncorroborated statements merely because the contemporaneous medical evidence is silent as to complaints or treatment for the relevant condition or symptoms. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 311 (2007). The lay statements of continued back, knees and feet pain since service is lay testimony that is competent as to features or symptoms, but not etiology, of an injury or illness and his personal observations. See Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 470 (1994). Hence, the Board finds no reason to doubt the credibility of the lay statements herein and as such, credits the lay statements in relation to the examiners opinion. Kahana v. Shinseki, 24. Vet. App.428 (2011). Thus, the Board therefore assigns the rationale of the August 2020 VA opinions more probative value than not. Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295, 301 (2008).

Based on the foregoing, after affording the Veteran the benefit of the doubt, the Board finds that the evidence weighs in favor of a finding that the Veteran's claimed lumbar spine, bilateral knees, bilateral metatarsalgia and bilateral plantar fasciitis conditions are related to service. In light of the foregoing, the Board concludes that the criteria for entitlement to service connection for the claimed lumbar spine, bilateral knees, bilateral metatarsalgia and bilateral plantar fasciitis conditions have been met, and the claim is hereby granted. 38 U.S.C.
ative value than not. Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295, 301 (2008).

Based on the foregoing, after affording the Veteran the benefit of the doubt, the Board finds that the evidence weighs in favor of a finding that the Veteran's claimed lumbar spine, bilateral knees, bilateral metatarsalgia and bilateral plantar fasciitis conditions are related to service. In light of the foregoing, the Board concludes that the criteria for entitlement to service connection for the claimed lumbar spine, bilateral knees, bilateral metatarsalgia and bilateral plantar fasciitis conditions have been met, and the claim is hereby granted. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303.

12. Service connection for a left shin splints condition is denied.

13. Service connection for a right shin splints condition is denied.

The Veteran seeks entitlement to service connection for a left shin splints and a right shin splints condition.

With reference and incorporation to the record of evidence above, the August 2020 VA foot conditions examination reflects that the examiner rendered diagnoses of bilateral metatarsalgia and bilateral plantar fasciitis. The examiner did not find that the Veteran has a diagnosis of a left shin splints condition nor a right shin splints condition and in fact noted that the shin splints have resolved.

The VA medical center treatment records (VATRs) of record are negative to reflect complaint or treatment for a left shin splints condition or a right shin splints condition.

The Board acknowledges the Veteran's September 2024 Board hearing testimony regarding his shins.

After a review of the totality of the evidence, the Board finds that the Veteran has submitted insufficient evidence to indicate that he has a current shin splints disability that is related to an event, injury, or disease that occurred in service. See 38 U.S.C. § 1168(a); 38 C.F.R. 3.159; McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). The Board notes that the Veteran was afforded a VA foot conditions examination at which time the examiner noted that the Veteran reported that he had shin splints in service; however the examiner did not find nor render a diagnosis of shin splints and indicated that the shin splints condition resolved.

Here, the Board notes that although the Veteran is competent to report his own symptoms and events he personally witnessed or took part in, he is not competent to opine as to the etiology of his own medical diagnoses. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Lay testimony is competent as to features or symptoms, but not etiology, of an injury or illness. See Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 470 (1994).

Further, the record reflects that the VATRs for the period on appeal are silent to reflect diagnosis nor treatment for shin splints. Thus, the Board finds that no further development of the Veteran's claim for entitlement to service connection for shin splints is required.

As described above, the first prong of a service connection claim is a current disability. The evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Veteran has had any shin splints condition during the pendency of the appeal. While the Veteran believes he has had shin splints and D.Y.C. stated that the Veteran complained of his shin, the Veteran has not been shown to have the requisite medical knowledge and expertise to be deemed competent to provide a diagnosis in this case. See Jandreau, 492 F.3d at 1376. Consequently, the Board gives more probative weight to the competent medical evidence of record, which fails to identify any current shin splints condition.

Accordingly, in the absence of proof of a current disability, there can be no valid claim for service connection. Boyer v. West, 210 F.3d 1351, 1353 (Fed. Cir. 2000); Giplin v. West, 155 F.3d 1353 (Fed. Cir. 1998); Brammer v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 223, 225 (1992). The requirement that a current disability be present is satisfied "when a claimant has a disability at the time a claim for VA disability compensation is filed or during the pendency of that claim...even though the disability resolves prior to the Secretary's adjudication of the claim." McClain v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App
valid claim for service connection. Boyer v. West, 210 F.3d 1351, 1353 (Fed. Cir. 2000); Giplin v. West, 155 F.3d 1353 (Fed. Cir. 1998); Brammer v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 223, 225 (1992). The requirement that a current disability be present is satisfied "when a claimant has a disability at the time a claim for VA disability compensation is filed or during the pendency of that claim...even though the disability resolves prior to the Secretary's adjudication of the claim." McClain v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 319 (2007); see also Romanowsky v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 289 (2013).

The Board is cognizant of Saunders, in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit explained that where pain alone results in functional impairment that affects earning capacity, even if there is no identified underlying diagnosis, it can constitute a disability. Saunders v. Wilkie, 886 F.3d 1356, 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2018).

However, the Veteran has not provided evidence that he has a current compensable shin splints condition that has resulted in functional impairment in work or in earning capacity. Thus, the evidence of record does not show that the Veteran's claimed shin splints condition results in functional impairment of earning capacity.

Congress specifically limits entitlement to service-connected disease or injury where such cases have resulted in a disability and in the absence of a proof of present disability there can be no claim. Brammer v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 223, 225 (1992) (finding service connection presupposes a current diagnosis of the condition claimed).

The Board acknowledges the Veteran's contentions that he is entitled to benefits based on his service. While the Board is truly appreciative for the Veteran's service and is sympathetic to his contentions, the Board is bound by law, and its decision is dictated by the relevant statutes and regulations. Moreover, the Board is without authority to grant benefits simply because it might perceive such a grant to be equitable. See Harvey v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 416, 425(1994). The Board also observes that "no equities, no matter how compelling, can create a right to payment out of the United States Treasury that has not been provided for by Congress." Smith v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 429, 432-33(1992).

In the absence of any credible and competent evidence tending to show that the Veteran has a diagnosis of any shin splints condition that causes functional limitations, service connection for a shin splints condition is not warranted. In reaching this conclusion, the Board has considered the applicability of the benefit of the doubt doctrine; the weight of the evidence is persuasively against the Veteran's claim, and the doctrine is not applicable. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. Accordingly, the Veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for a shin splints condition is denied.

DELYVONNE M. WHITEHEAD

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board Alli, Q.

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.

Analyze in VA Law Explorer