Citation Nr: 19153167 Decision Date: 07/09/19 Archive Date: 07/09/19 DOCKET NO. 16-41 343 DATE: July 9, 2019 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome is denied FINDING OF FACT The evidence of record does not establish that the Veteran has Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1110, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Air Force from October 1999 to November 19996 and in the Air Force Reserves from February 2005 to June 2005. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2011 rating decision. The Board notes that the Veteran’s service connection claim for Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome was initially denied in a March 2008 rating decision. The rating decision stated that there was no evidence of a current disability. The Veteran did not timely appeal the claim. Nevertheless, the record reflects that the evidence associated with the claims file since the issuance of the March 2008 rating decision includes military personnel records. These records contain multiple echocardiograms used to assess the Veteran’s qualification for Worldwide Duty in light of his prior diagnosis of Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome. Consequently, the Board finds that these records are pertinent to the Veteran’s service connection claim for Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome. Applicable regulations provide that, at any time after VA issues a decision on a claim, if VA receives or associates with the claims file relevant official service department records that existed and had not been associated with the claims file when VA first decided the claim, VA will reconsider the claim, notwithstanding paragraph (a) of the same section (which defines new and material evidence). The regulation further identifies service records related to a claimed in-service event, injury, or disease as relevant service department records. 38 C.F.R. § 3.156 (c)(1)(i). Thus, new and material evidence is not needed to reopen a previously denied claim when relevant personnel records and/or any other relevant service department records are received after a prior final denial. The claim is instead reviewed on a de novo basis. In light of the relevant official service department records received after the March 2008 rating decision, the Veteran’s service connection claim for Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome will be reviewed on a de novo basis. Entitlement to service connection for Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome The Veteran contends that he currently has a heart condition to include Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome, which he asserts is related to his active service. Specifically, he has indicated that he almost died in boot camp due to stress and heart palpitations. Review of the record does not indicate a current diagnosis of Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome or any peristent symptoms of a cardiac condition. To the contrary, a February 2008 VA examination indicates that since his first discharge in November 1999, the Veteran has had electrocardiograms without Wolff-Parkinson-White electrical conduction activities noted. In finding that the Veteran did not have a current cardiac condition, the February 2008 examiner noted that the Veteran had a normal EKG on the date of the examination, did not complain of any cardiac symptoms, and was able to enlist in the Air Force Reserves and complete fitness tests without restrictions. As noted at the February 2008 VA examination, the Veteran joined the Air Force Reserves in July 2000. Accordingly, he underwent a battery of tests to assess his fitness for continued service. Reserve treatment records from April 2000 show that the Veteran had a history of Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome that was treated with ablation. The Veteran was not on medication and denied any history of syncope, palpitations, chest pain, or heart failure type symptoms. The Veteran’s reserve treatment records also show normal EKGs from January 2004, July 2004 and April 2006. In April 2006, the Veteran was found qualified for Worldwide duty. The Veteran’s history of Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome was noted but the examiner indicated that it was not an issue or a recurrent problem. Private hospital records from January 2013 indicate that the Veteran was treated for heart palpitations which lasted minutes and then resolved. The Veteran reported no chest pain or shortness of breath. He had a norm ECG, unremarkable cardiac panel and comprehensive metabolic panel. No arrythmia was noted and the Veteran was diagnosed with palpitations. Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome is still listed on the Veteran’s problem lists in private and VA treatment records alike. However, VA treatment records consistently indicate the condition was successfully treated with ablation in 2000. From December 2015 to June 2017, the Veteran was seen by L.L., a private certified registered nurse practitioner. During treatment, the Veteran regularly denied any cardiovascular symptoms. When assessed, his heart rate and rhythm were consistently regular. Lacking a current diagnosis for Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome, the Veteran does not meet the cornerstone element of service connection. Brammer v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 223, 225 (1992). As such, an assessment of the remaining elements is not necessary, and service connection for Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome is not warranted. The Board finds the March 2008 examiner’s findings and the other medical evidence of record to be highly probative. The Veteran did not offer any lay testimony to contradict the competent medical evidence of record. Thus, the claim of entitlement to service connection for Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome is denied because there is no current disability. GAYLE STROMMEN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD C. Sherman Associate Counsel 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.