Citation Nr: 18152319 Decision Date: 11/21/18 Archive Date: 11/21/18 DOCKET NO. 16-53 160 DATE: November 21, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for tuberculosis is denied. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran does not have active tuberculosis disability. CONCLUSION OF LAW 1. The criteria for service connection for tuberculosis are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(a). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from July 1993 to July 2014. This case is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2015 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Board notes that the Veteran was furnished a Statement of the Case (SOC) in August 2016 pertaining to the issues of entitlement to service connection for myopia, astigmatism, and decline in eye sight; entitlement to service connection for tuberculosis; entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss (claimed as decline in auditory hearing); and entitlement to service connection for heart murmur and mitral valve prolapse. However, in an October 2016 VA Form 9, the Veteran specifically noted that he has read the statement of the case and any supplemental statement of the case received, and that he was only appealing the issue of entitlement to service connection for tuberculosis. Given the Veteran’s timely VA Form 9, the Board finds that only the appeal of the issue of entitlement to service connection for tuberculosis has been perfected. In other words, the Board does not have jurisdiction over the issues of entitlement to service connection for myopia, astigmatism, and decline in eye sight, bilateral hearing loss, and entitlement to service connection for heart murmur and mitral valve prolapse. Therefore, the Board limits this appeal to the issue of entitlement to service connection for tuberculosis. Service Connection Service connection may be established for a disability resulting from personal injury suffered or disease contracted in the line of duty or for aggravation of preexisting injury suffered or disease contracted in the line of duty. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Generally, to establish service connection, there must be lay or medical evidence of (1) a current disability, (2) incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury in service, and (3) a nexus between the in-service injury or disease and the current disability. See 38 U.S.C. § 1110; Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313, 1315-16 (Fed.Cir.2009); Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166-67 (Fed.Cir.2004); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Lay assertions may serve to support a claim for service connection by establishing the occurrence of observable events or the presence of disability or symptoms of disability subject to lay observation. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007); see also Buchanan v. Nicholson, 451 F. 3d 1331, 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (addressing lay evidence as potentially competent to support presence of disability even where not corroborated by contemporaneous medical evidence). The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) has clarified that lay evidence can be competent and sufficient to establish a diagnosis or etiology when (1) a lay person is competent to identify a medical condition; (2) the lay person is reporting a contemporaneous medical diagnosis, or (3) lay testimony describing symptoms at the time supports a later diagnosis by a medical professional. Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2009). Service connection may also be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all of the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (d). Service connection for certain chronic diseases, including tuberculosis, may also be established based upon a legal “presumption” by showing that it manifested itself to a degree of 10 percent or more within one year (or in the case of tuberculosis, three years) from the date of separation from service. 38 U.S.C. § 1112 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307, 3.309 (2018). The option of establishing service connection through a demonstration of continuity of symptomatology rather than through a finding of nexus is specifically limited to the chronic disabilities listed in 38 C.F.R. § 3.309 (a). See Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2013) (rejecting the argument that continuity of symptomatology in § 3.303(b) has any role other than to afford an alternative route to service connection for specific chronic diseases). A May 2011 service treatment record indicates that the Veteran had a positive test for tuberculosis in 1997 while in Korea, and that INH treatment was previously completed. The Veteran was not noted to currently be treated for tuberculosis. Similarly, an April 2014 treatment record indicates “inactive tuberculosis.” A November 2016 VA treatment record indicates a tuberculosis screening with no signs or symptoms found and no history of tuberculosis disease. A November 2016 VA treatment record also reports a positive PPD skin test in 2014, but again found no history of tuberculosis disease, no current treatments, and no current signs or symptoms. Given the medical evidence of record, the Veteran does not have a current tuberculosis disability. The medical evidence of record indicates positive PPD test results of tuberculosis, but consistently reports completion of treatment prior to discharge, with no symptoms, treatments, or tuberculosis disease post-service. Although the Veteran continues to receive a positive PPD test, this is not an indication of current disability. A PPD test result is considered to be a laboratory finding used in exploring a possible diagnosis of tuberculosis. See DORLAND’S ILLUSTRATED MEDICAL DICTIONARY 1506, 1979 (32nd ed. 2012). Service connection applies only to diseases and the residuals of injury, not clinical findings found in laboratory test results. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.1, 4.10; see also 61 Fed. Reg. 20,440, 20,445 (May 7, 1996) (Diagnoses such as hyperlipidemia, elevated triglycerides, and elevated cholesterol are actually laboratory results and are not, in and of themselves, disabilities, and are not appropriate entities for the rating schedule). Thus, service connection is not warranted based solely on a showing of a positive PPD, absent a finding of active disease. The Board acknowledges the Veteran’s assertion that his latent tuberculosis should be service connected due to the possibility it could go active later in life However, the existence of a current disability is the cornerstone of a claim for VA disability compensation. See Degmetich v. Brown, 104 F.3d 1328 (1997). Congress specifically limits entitlement for service-connected disease or injury to cases where such incidents have resulted in a disability. In the absence of proof of a present disability there can be no valid claim. Brammer v. Brown, 3 Vet. App. 223 (1992). (Continued on the next page)   As the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim, the benefit of the doubt rule is not for application and as such, entitlement to service connection for tuberculosis disability is denied. 38 U.S.C. § 5107, Gilbert v. Derwinski, Vet. App. 49, 55-57. Accordingly, service connection for tuberculosis, to include a positive PPD test, is not warranted. Michael Pappas Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD J. Tunis, Associate Counsel