Citation Nr: 21077185 Decision Date: 12/28/21 Archive Date: 12/28/21 DOCKET NO. 17-61 170 DATE: December 28, 2021 ORDER Service connection for hypertension is denied. REMANDED Service connection for a skin disorder is remanded. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran has a current disability of hypertension. 2. The Veteran did not experience an in-service injury, disease, or event associated with hypertension. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for hypertension have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 101, 5103, 5103A, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.6, 3.102, 3.159, 3.303, 3.304. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from July 1973 to July 1976. This matter is on appeal from a March 2017 rating decision issued by the Regional Office (RO). The Veteran testified in at a virtual Board hearing in August 2021 before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. The hearing transcript has been associated with the record. Duties to Notify and Assist The Board finds that the duties to notify and assist the Veteran in this case have been fulfilled. Neither the Veteran nor the representative has raised any issues with the duty to notify or duty to assist. See Scott v. McDonald, 789 F.3d 1375, 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2015). 1. Service Connection for Hypertension Service connection may be granted for disability arising from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. As a general matter, service connection for a disability requires evidence of: (1) the existence of a current disability, (2) the existence of the disease or injury in service, and (3) a relationship or nexus between the current disability and any injury or disease during service. Service connection may be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). The Veteran generally requests compensation for hypertension. The Veteran claims that the hypertension is related to migraine headaches; however, the Board notes that the Veteran is not service connected for migraine headaches and, as such, secondary service connection will not be addressed as there is no basis for secondary service as a matter of law. See August 2021 Transcript. The evidence shows a current hypertension disability. See June 2016 VA Treatment Records. The weight of the evidence is against finding that the Veteran experienced an in-service injury, disease, or event associated with hypertension. Upon review of service treatment records, there are no complaints of or treatment for symptoms related to hypertension. While there is no service separation examination of record, the Veteran sought treatment for several minor ailments but did not seek treatment for hypertension. See April 1974 Service Treatment Records (Rash); October 1974 Service Treatment Records (Wart on left hand); March 1975 Service Treatment Records (Coughing up blood). During the August 2021 Board hearing the Veteran specifically denied having high blood pressure in service and reported that his first diagnosis of hypertension was a few years ago. Upon review of the record, the first report of hypertension symptoms of record is in March 2015 VA treatment records, approximately 38 years after service separation. For these reasons, the preponderance of the evidence is against finding that the criteria for service connection for hypertension have been met; thus, the appeal must be denied. REASONS FOR REMAND 2. Service connection for a skin disorder is remanded. The evidence shows a current skin disorders, diagnosed as dermatitis, bilateral foot onychomycosis, and onychocryptosis. During the September 2017 VA examination, the diagnosis was dermatitis (resolved) and bilateral foot onychomycosis and onychocryptosis. In terms of the dermatitis, while the September 2017 VA examination indicates that the dermatitis has been resolved, the Veteran credibly testified during the August 2021 Board hearing that the dermatitis flares up and was not apparent during the VA examination. The Veteran is competent and credible to report the dermatitis and flareups of a skin disorder. See McCartt v. West, 12 Vet. App. 164, 167-68 (1999) (veteran alleged skin disorder of boils, blotches, rash, soreness, and itching since service; Court implied that this may be the type of condition lending itself to lay observation and satisfy the nexus requirement). In terms of the bilateral foot onychomycosis and onychocryptosis, the September 2017 VA examiner did not proffer an explanation for the negative nexus opinion. The Board will remand this issue in an effort to obtain a VA examination that includes medical opinions with supporting rationale. The issue of service connection for a skin disorder is REMANDED for the following action: Schedule a VA skin disorders examination to help determine whether the skin disorder diagnosed as dermatitis and bilateral foot onychomycosis and onychocryptosis are etiologically related to service, including the in-service rashes treated in April and November 1974. A rationale for all opinions and a discussion of the facts and medical principles involved should be provided. The VA examiner should offer the following opinions: (a.) Is it at least as likely as not (i.e., probability of 50 percent or more) that the dermatitis is etiologically related to the in-service rashes treated in April and November 1974? The examiner is to assume as fact that the Veteran has flareups of rashes, notwithstanding such were not shown on days of examinations. (Continued on the next page) (b.) Is it at least as likely as not (i.e., probability of 50 percent or more) that the bilateral foot onychomycosis and onychocryptosis are etiologically related to the in-service rashes treated in April and November 1974? J. PARKER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Costantino, 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.