Citation Nr: 20006953 Decision Date: 01/28/20 Archive Date: 01/28/20 DOCKET NO. 16-40 267 DATE: January 28, 2020 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for a cardiovascular disorder, claimed as hypertension, is denied. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran’s hypertension was not shown in service or for many years thereafter, and is not otherwise related to active duty service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for hypertension are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(a), 3.304, 3.307, 3.309. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from August 1971 to August 1973. Service Connection The Veteran is seeking service connection for a cardiovascular disorder, claimed as hypertension. In general, under the relevant laws and regulations, service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131. Generally, the evidence must show: (1) the existence of a present disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the present disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166 -67(Fed. Cir. 2004); Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498, 505 (1995). Entitlement to service connection for a cardiovascular disorder, claimed as hypertension The Board concludes that, while the Veteran has a current diagnosis of hypertension, the preponderance of the evidence weighs against finding that the Veteran's disorders began during service or are otherwise related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1363, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303 (a), (d), 3.304, 3.307, 3.309. Next, with respect to the Veteran’s diagnosed cardiovascular disorder, the service treatment records do not report any signs, symptoms, or a diagnosis of such disorders at any point during service. In fact, the Veteran's August 1973 separation examination is silent for any symptoms or a diagnosis related to a cardiovascular disorder. In fact, the Veteran reported that he was in "good" health and specifically denied any related complaints or symptoms thereto. The Board notes that the post-service medical evidence indicates the current presence of a cardiovascular disorder. However, the objective medical evidence does not demonstrate any symptoms, manifestations, or a diagnosis related to hypertension until February 2013. Therefore, continuity of symptoms has not been shown based on the clinical evidence, including for purposes of the chronic disease presumption under 38 C.F.R. § 3.307 (a)(3). As part of this claim, the Board recognizes the statements from the Veteran regarding his history of symptoms since service. In this regard, while the Veteran is not competent to make a diagnosis related these disorders, as they may not be diagnosed by their unique and readily identifiable features, and thus requires a determination that is "medical in nature," he is nonetheless competent to testify about the presence of observable symptomatology, which may provide sufficient support for a claim of service connection, if credible, regardless of the lack of contemporaneous medical evidence. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2007); See Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 307 (2007); Buchanan v. Nicholson, 451 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2006). Nevertheless, the Board determines that the Veteran's reported history of continued symptomatology since active service, while competent, is nonetheless not sufficient to establish continuity of symptomology. As an initial matter, the large gap in treatment for the asserted conditions weighs against the Veteran's claims. See Kahana v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 428, at 439-40 (2014) (The Board may weigh silence in a medical record against lay testimony if the alleged injury, disease, or related symptoms would ordinarily have been recorded in the medical record being evaluated). Further, the Board notes that the Veteran filed a claim for VA education benefits in 1975, many years prior to filing the claims on appeal. Therefore, the fact that the Veteran was aware of the VA benefits system and sought out a claim for other benefits, but made no reference to the disorders he now claims, weighs heavily against his credibility. Next, service connection may also be granted when the evidence establishes a medical relationship between active duty service and current complaints. In this case, the Board finds that the weight of the competent evidence does not attribute the Veteran's claimed disorders to active duty, despite his contentions to the contrary. Here, the VA treatment records from February 2013 indicate that the Veteran’s hypertension occurred approximately 40 years after service. The Board also observes that the Veteran has not provided sufficient evidence, including private opinions and/or medical evidence to establish a nexus between his complaints and active service. Of note, the Board observes that the Veteran's representative has not presented argument regarding the issues of entitlement to service connection for hypertension. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107 (a) (noting that it is a claimant's responsibility to support a claim for VA benefits). Finally, given the state of the record, there has arisen no duty to provide an examination on these matters. McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). Indeed, given the absence of in-service symptoms, any opinion provided could only be based on speculation and insufficient for service connection purposes. As part of this claim, the Board recognizes the statements from the Veteran regarding the relationship between his hypertension and active service. Nevertheless, while he is competent to provide testimony regarding observable symptomatology, he is not competent to provide a nexus opinion in this case. This issue is also medically complex, as it requires knowledge of the interaction between multiple systems in the body and interpretation of complicated diagnostic medical testing. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377 n.4 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Therefore, the unsubstantiated statements regarding the claimed diagnosis and etiology of the Veteran's disorder are found to lack competency. In light of the above discussion, the Board concludes that the preponderance of the evidence is against his claims for service connection, and there is no doubt to be otherwise resolved. 38 U.S.C. § 5107 (b); Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). Therefore, the appeal is denied. B.T. KNOPE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Q. Hernan, Associate Counsel