Citation Nr: 21063250 Decision Date: 10/13/21 Archive Date: 10/13/21 DOCKET NO. 18-50 508 DATE: October 13, 2021 ORDER Service connection for a respiratory disorder is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran had active duty from September 1955 to November 1957. 2. The Veteran had respiratory symptoms in service; the symptoms were not shown to be chronic. A current diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is not causally or etiologically related to service. CONCLUSION OF LAW A respiratory disorder was not incurred in service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 5103(a), 5103A, 5107 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.159, 3.303 (2020). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION In February 2019, July 2020, and July 2021, the Board remanded the issue for further development. It now returns to the Board for adjudication. Turning to the relevant laws and regulations, service connection may be granted on a direct basis as a result of disease or injury incurred in service based on nexus using a three-element test: (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 in or aggravated by service. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303(a), (d); Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1363, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009). Turning to the evidence, the first element of service connection a current disability is met, as a diagnosis of COPD has been shown throughout the appeal period. Specifically, April 2008 VA medical records show a diagnosis of COPD as early as August 2006. As such, the first element is met. Next, the second element an in-service incurrence is also met. Although a formal finding that the service treatment records (STRs) were destroyed and unavailable, the Veteran has related that during service he was exposed to environmental hazards such as diesel fumes, generator output, and other hazards associated with working in the motor pool. He also claimed in May 2021 correspondence that he spent two weeks in a hospital for a breathing condition. There is no evidence contradicting these statements, the records that could substantiate them have been confirmed as destroyed, and his recollection is credible. Thus, to this extent, the second element is met. As to the third element a medical nexus the evidence does not support the appeal. Specifically, an April 2021 VA examiner considered the Veteran's statements that he was exposed to environmental hazards such as diesel fumes, generator output, and other hazards while working in the motor pool. The examiner noted a 2002 clinical record that the Veteran had a history of smoking a pack of cigarettes per day for 30 years, a history of a diagnoses of moderately severe COPD in a May 2014 record, and that COPD was relatively stable in an April 2018 clinical record. After a review of the clinical records and an examination of the Veteran, including a chest X-ray and pulmonary function tests, the examiner found it was less likely than not that COPD was caused by active duty. Specifically, the examiner noted that the STRs were not of record but he considered the Veteran's lay history in rendering an opinion. To that end, the examiner found that it was less likely than not that COPD was due to service. The examiner reasoned that COPD did not manifest for three decades after the Veteran's claim of exposure to in-service environmental hazards. In addition, the examiner noted that the Veteran was a chronic smoker which was one of the most common causes of COPD. This evidence weighs against the claim. Of note, there is no contradictory medical opinion of record. Although the Veteran has reported that he has experienced respiratory symptoms since service, multiple attempts have been made to obtain authorization from him in order to locate records from his primary care physician first identified in an October 2002 VA treatment note. Despite these attempts, the Veteran has not provided such authorization, or submitted these private medical records himself. The VA has satisfied the duty to assist in this regard in making these attempts. See Wood v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 190, 193 (1991). As such, the only medical opinion finds no medical nexus and is supported by the medical evidence. As such, the medical evidence does not support service connection. The Board has considered the Veteran's lay statements that his disorder was caused by service. He is competent to report symptoms because this requires only personal knowledge as it comes to him through his senses. However, he is not competent to offer an opinion as to the etiology of his current disorder due to the medical complexity of the matter involved. Such competent evidence has been provided by the service records, clinical evidence, and the examination obtained and associated with the claims file. Here, the Board attaches greater probative weight to the clinical findings than to his statements. In light of the above, the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim for service connection and there is no doubt to be otherwise resolved. As such, the appeal is denied. Finally, the Veteran has not raised any other issues, nor have any other issues been reasonably raised by the record, for the Board's consideration. See Doucette v. Shulkin, 28 Vet. App. 366, 369-370 (2017) (confirming that the Board is not required to address issues unless they are specifically raised by the claimant or reasonably raised by the evidence of record). L. HOWELL Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Brendan A. Evans, 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.