Citation Nr: 18146252 Decision Date: 10/31/18 Archive Date: 10/30/18 DOCKET NO. 15-22 845 DATE: October 31, 2018 ORDER Service connection for a dental disability for Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) compensation purposes is denied. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran’s dental disorder, claimed as loss of teeth, is not considered a disability for VA compensation purposes. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for a dental disorder for compensation purposes have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.310, 3.381, 4.150. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from February 1968 to February 1970, with confirmed service in the Republic of Vietnam. He was awarded a Combat Infantryman Badge, among other awards and decorations. In February 2016, the Veteran and his representative appeared at a Decision Review Officer (DRO) hearing at the Regional Office (RO). A transcript of the proceeding is associated with the record. The Board notes that the Veteran’s claim for a dental disability for compensation purposes includes a claim for VA outpatient treatment. See Mays v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 302 (1993). However, as the Veteran has a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) due to service-connected disabilities, he is already authorized any needed dental treatment such that referral is not required. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.381(a), 17.161(h) (Class IV). He is directed to contact the local VA Medical Center if he has difficulty accessing outpatient dental treatment. Neither the Veteran nor his representative has raised any issues with the duty to notify or duty to assist. The Veteran asserts that service connection is warranted for gum disease and loss of teeth as secondary to his service-connected diabetes mellitus. The Veteran and his representative submitted multiple articles explaining the association between diabetes and periodontal disease and other oral health problems. However, the Board concludes that the preponderance of the evidence weighs against a finding that the Veteran has a dental disability that may be service connected for compensation purposes. Service treatment records (STRs) report treatment for carious teeth and a March 1968 STR reported a lower left molar that was excavated due to pain with an indication that it may require extraction. A November 1969 discharge examination recorded multiple missing teeth. Post-service VA dental treatment records document treatment for periodontitis and tooth extractions for erupted teeth and retained roots. The Board notes that treatable carious teeth, replaceable missing teeth, dental or alveolar abscesses, and periodontal disease are not disabilities for VA compensation purposes. 38 U.S.C. § 1712; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.381, 4.150, Diagnostic Code 9913. Further, the Veteran has not contended, nor does the evidence indicate, that any missing teeth or bone and tissue loss constitutes loss of substance of body of the maxilla or the mandible due to trauma or disease such as osteomyelitis. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.150 (noting that current legal authority only allows compensation for certain types of dental and oral conditions, such as impairment of the mandible, loss of a portion of the ramus, and loss of a portion of the maxilla). Rather, a February 2015 examination report diagnosed periodontal disease and a related panographic imaging report reflected multiple missing teeth, retained roots, caries, and severe generalized bone loss. The examiner found no anatomical loss or bony injury to mandible, maxilla, or teeth other than due to loss of alveolar process as a result of periodontal disease. Additionally, a February 2016 addendum medical opinion confirmed that periodontitis was not a disabling disability for compensation purposes. There is no evidence of record in conflict with the above. The Board is sympathetic to the Veteran’s contentions that his service-connected diabetes affects his oral health and that such additional health problems should therefore be service-connected; however, as the Veteran seeks service connection for a dental disorder that may not be considered for compensation purposes, the claim for service connection for compensation purposes must be denied. Nathan Kroes Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD A. Odya-Weis, Counsel