Citation Nr: 21042601 Decision Date: 07/13/21 Archive Date: 07/13/21 DOCKET NO. 16-61 244 DATE: July 13, 2021 ORDER 1. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is denied. 2. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is denied. 3. Entitlement to service connection for gout is denied. 4. Entitlement to service connection for hypertension is denied. 5. Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus is denied. 6. Entitlement to service connection for left upper extremity peripheral neuropathy is denied. 7. Entitlement to service connection for right upper extremity peripheral neuropathy is denied. 8. Entitlement to service connection for left lower extremity peripheral neuropathy is denied. 9. Entitlement to service connection for right lower extremity peripheral neuropathy is denied. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran is not shown to have a diagnosis of bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, gout, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, or peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral upper and/or lower extremities. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for service connection for bilateral hearing loss have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.385. 2. The criteria for service connection for tinnitus have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304. 3. The criteria for service connection for gout have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304, 3.307, 3.309. 4. The criteria for service connection for hypertension have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304, 3.307, 3.309. 5. The criteria for service connection for diabetes mellitus have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304, 3.307, 3.309. 6. The criteria for service connection for left upper extremity peripheral neuropathy have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304, 3.307, 3.309, 3.310. 7. The criteria for service connection for right upper extremity peripheral neuropathy have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304, 3.307, 3.309, 3.310. 8. The criteria for service connection for left lower extremity peripheral neuropathy have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304, 3.307, 3.309, 3.310. 9. The criteria for service connection for right lower extremity peripheral neuropathy have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304, 3.307, 3.309, 3.310. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS The appellant is a Veteran who had active service from May 1970 to November 1971, to include service in the Republic of Vietnam. This case is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2016 Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) rating decision that denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, gout, hypertension, diabetes, and peripheral neuropathy of all four extremities. In December 2016, the Veteran requested a Board hearing. In December 2019, the Veteran received notification that a hearing was scheduled for January 30, 2020, but he did not appear at the hearing and did not explain his absence. As such, the Veteran's hearing request is considered to have been withdrawn. See 38 C.F.R. § 20.704. Service Connection Service connection will be granted if the evidence demonstrates that a current disability resulted from an injury or disease incurred in or aggravated by active military service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Service connection requires competent evidence showing: (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, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Service connection may also be established under 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b), where a condition in service is noted but is not, in fact, chronic, or where a diagnosis of chronicity may be legitimately questioned. The continuity of symptomatology provision of 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b) has been interpreted as an alternative to service connection only for the specific chronic diseases listed in 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a). See Walker v. Shinseki, 718 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2013). Service connection may also be established with certain chronic diseases based upon a legal presumption by showing that the disorder manifested itself to a degree of 10 percent disabling or more within one year from the date of separation from service. Such disease shall be presumed to have been incurred in service, even though there is no evidence of such disease during the period of service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1112, 1113, 1137; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307, 3.309(a). While the disease need not be diagnosed within the presumption period, it must be shown, by acceptable lay or medical evidence, that there were characteristic manifestations of the disease to the required degree during that time. Certain chronic diseases may be presumed to be service connected as due to exposure to herbicide agents in service if manifested in a veteran who had active military, naval, or air service in the Republic of Vietnam from on January 9, 1962 and ending on May 7, 1975, in the in the Republic of Vietnam (including its waterways) from January 9, 1962 to May 7, 1975. 38 U.S.C. § 1116; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307, 3.309(e), 3.313. This presumption may be rebutted by affirmative evidence to the contrary. 38 U.S.C. § 1113; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307, 3.309. The Veteran's service treatment records (STRs) from his active service do not show any complaints, treatment, or diagnosis of bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, gout, hypertension, diabetes, or peripheral neuropathy. At his January 1970 entrance physical, he had a normal examination and denied having any hearing loss, ear trouble, high or low blood pressure, neuritis, or paralysis. At a November 1971 separation physical, he had a normal physical examination. In addition, he reported that, since his last examination, his conditions had not changed. He also reported that his condition was excellent. The claims file does not show that the Veteran received post-service treatment for any bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, gout, hypertension, diabetes, or peripheral neuropathy. In February 2016, the Veteran was scheduled for VA examinations for his bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, gout, hypertension, diabetes, and peripheral neuropathy; however, the Veteran failed to respond to the notice of VA examinations. He has not asserted good cause for his failure to appear. Under VA regulations, when a claimant fails to report for an examination scheduled in conjunction with an original compensation claim, the claim shall be rated based on the evidence of record. 38 C.F.R. § 3.655. The Veteran has not submitted any probative medical evidence showing that he has a current diagnosis of bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, gout, hypertension, diabetes, or peripheral neuropathy. The Board observes that the diagnoses of these disabilities is a complex medical question, it requires medical expertise, informed by clinical testing, and cannot be diagnosed by lay observation alone. The Veteran is a layperson, and does not profess to have any medical expertise. He does not cite to supporting clinical data or medical opinion or treatise evidence, and his own opinion has no probative value. See Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Furthermore, the Veteran failed to inform VA of any treatment for these asserted conditions, submit any medical evidence supporting his assertions, respond to the scheduled VA examinations, attend a scheduled hearing before the Board, or request rescheduling the VA examinations or hearing. As such, a remand for further development is unnecessary and doing so would serve no useful or meaningful purpose and only instead result in unnecessarily imposing additional burdens on VA with no potential benefit flowing to the Veteran. See Soyini v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 540, 546 (1991). The threshold requirement for substantiating a claim of service connection (whether direct or secondary) is that there must be competent evidence of the disability for which service connection is sought. In the absence of proof of a current disability, there is no valid claim for service connection. Boyer v. West, 210 F.3d 1351, 1353 (Fed. Cir. 2000); Brammer v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 223, 225 (1992). Here, it is not shown by competent (medical) evidence that the Veteran was found to have bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, gout, hypertension, diabetes, or peripheral neuropathy. Accordingly, the threshold requirement is not met. Considering the foregoing, the Board concludes that the preponderance of the evidence is against the claims. Therefore, the appeal in these matters must be denied. Katherine Kiemle Buckley Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board T. Berryman, 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.