Citation Nr: 21003871 Decision Date: 01/25/21 Archive Date: 01/25/21 DOCKET NO. 18-45 151 DATE: January 25, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for cerebral hemorrhage is denied. Entitlement to service connection for a heart condition is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The preponderance of the evidence is against finding that cerebral hemorrhage began during active service or is otherwise related to an in-service injury or disease. 2. The preponderance of the evidence is against finding that a heart condition began during active service or is otherwise related to an in-service injury or disease. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for service connection for cerebral hemorrhage are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. 2. The criteria for service connection for a heart condtion are not 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 in the United States Army from March 1961 to March 1964. In July 2019, the Board remanded the issue below on appeal for further development, and the case has since been returned to the Board. The Board finds that the AOJ has substantially complied with the remand directives. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). Service Connection Service connection is warranted for disability that was caused or aggravated by an injury or disease incurred in the line of duty in active military service. 38U.S.C.§1131; 38C.F.R.3.303(a). Establishing service connection generally requires evidence of (1) a current disability, (2) an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury, and (3) a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the present disability. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Entitlement to service connection for cerebral hemorrhage The Veteran contends that his cerebral hemorrhage is the result of his active service. Service treatment records (STRs) are silent for any diagnosis, treatment, or complaints of cerebral hemorrhage. In the July 2019 Board remand, the Board directed the AOJ, in pertinent part, to ask the Veteran to complete a VA Form 21-4142, for his private medical treatment. The AOJ subsequently requested that the Veteran complete VA Form 21-4142a, General Release for Medical Provider Information to the Department of Veterans Affairs, three separate times with no response. The remaining medical evidence of record indicates treatment for a cerebral hemorrhage but no discussion on its etiology. Based on the foregoing evidence of record, service connection is not warranted. To that end, the Board notes that the record is silent for a positive medical opinion connecting the Veteran’s diagnosis with his active service. Further, while the Veteran contends that his cerebral hemorrhage is the result of his active service, he is not competent to opine on a complex question such as etiology. See Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F. 3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007); see also Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2009). Simply stated, the Veteran’s DD-214 (showing no chronic disability at separation from service) and post-service treatment records (showing no competent medical evidence linking the asserted disability to service) outweigh the Veteran’s contentions. A basis upon which to grant the Veteran’s service connection claim for cerebral hemorrhage has not been established, therefore, the claim must be denied. As the preponderance of the evidence is against the service connection claim, the benefit-of-the-doubt doctrine is not helpful to the Veteran. See generally Gilbert, 1 Vet. App. at 49. Entitlement to service connection for a heart condition The Veteran contends that his heart condition is the result of his active service. Service treatment records (STRs) are silent for any diagnosis, treatment, or complaints of a heart condition. In the July 2019 Board remand, the Board directed the AOJ, in pertinent part, to ask the Veteran to complete a VA Form 21-4142, for his private medical treatment. The AOJ subsequently requested that the Veteran complete VA Form 21-4142a, General Release for Medical Provider Information to the Department of Veterans Affairs, three separate times with no response. The remaining medical evidence of record indicates treatment for a heart condition but no discussion on its etiology. Based on the foregoing evidence of record, service connection is not warranted. To that end, the Board notes that the record is silent for a positive medical opinion connecting the Veteran’s diagnosis with his active service. Further, while the Veteran contends that his heart condition is the result of his active service, he is not competent to opine on a complex question such as etiology. See Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F. 3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007); see also Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2009). Simply stated, the Veteran’s DD-214 (showing no chronic disability at separation from service) and post-service treatment records (showing no competent medical evidence linking the asserted disability to service) outweigh the Veteran’s contentions. A basis upon which to grant the Veteran’s service connection claim for heart condition has not been established, therefore, the claim must be denied. As the preponderance of the evidence is against the service connection claim, the benefit-of-the-doubt doctrine is not helpful to the Veteran. See generally Gilbert, 1 Vet. App. at 49. L. M. BARNARD Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board R. A. Elliott II, 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.