92 Decision Citation: BVA 92-03579 Y92 BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C. 20420 DOCKET NO. 90-26 390 ) DATE ) ) ) THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to service connection for a lung disorder. 2. Entitlement to service connection for presbyopia. 3. Entitlement to service connection for alcoholism. 4. Entitlement to service connection for a cardiovascular disorder. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: The American Legion WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD George R. Senyk, Counsel INTRODUCTION These matters came before the Board on appeal from a rating decision of the St. Petersburg, Florida, Regional Office (hereinafter RO) in July 1989. The appellant is a veteran who had active military service from January 1962 until February 1966 and from July 1972 through February 1988. His notice of disagreement was received in August 1989. A statement of the case was issued in September 1989. A substantive appeal, in which the veteran requested a hearing, was received in September 1989. A hearing was held at the RO in December 1989. The hearing officer's decision was issued in January 1990. This granted service connection for arthritis of the hands, knees and cervical spine and, accordingly, that issue is no longer before us. The decision was implemented by a RO rating decision in January 1990. A supplemental statement of the case was issued in February 1990. The American Legion, who have represented the veteran throughout this appeal, submitted written arguments in May 1990. The case was received at the Board, docketed and forwarded to the veteran's representative for review in July 1990. The American Legion submitted written arguments in December 1990. In March 1991, the Board remanded this case for further development. In May 1991, the RO issued a rating decision encompassing the additional development. A supplemental statement of the case was issued in May 1991. The American Legion submitted written arguments in September 1991. In October 1991, the case was returned to the Board, redocketed and sent to the veteran's representative for review. The American Legion submitted further written arguments in October 1991. This appeal has been developed as encompassing the two separate issues of: entitlement to service connection for a lung disorder and entitlement to service connection for the residuals of exposure to Otto fuel; and that is how the issues were characterized when the case was previously before us, in March 1991. Noting now that the claimed residuals of Otto fuel exposure are allegedly a lung disorder, we have elected, for the purposes of consistency and clarity and to avoid unnecessary duplication, to merge the issues of entitlement to service connection for a lung disorder and entitlement to service connection for residuals of Otto fuel exposure into the single issue of entitlement to service connection for a lung disorder. CONTENTIONS OF APPELLANT ON APPEAL The appellant alleges error in the rating decision which denied service connection for the claimed disabilities. He asserts that the evidence of record establishes that he had the onset of the claimed disorders in service and that, hence, service connection for each of the claimed disorders is warranted. He specifically states that a lung disorder resulted from exposure to Otto fuel in service and that when he had pulmonary function testing following such exposure the results revealed pulmonary function impairment. He requests that his exposure to Otto fuel in service be documented. He further asserts that he began losing visual acuity in service, necessitating changes in eyeglass lens prescriptions on several occasions. He asserts that hypertension leads to coronary artery disease and that, hence, service connection for heart disease is warranted. In addition, the veteran states that he never drank prior to service, but became an alcoholic during service. DECISION OF THE BOARD For the reasons and bases hereinafter set forth, it is the decision of the Board that the evidence supports the grant of service connection for a lung disorder. It is our decision that the preponderance of the evidence is against the veteran's claims for service connection for presbyopia, alcoholism and cardiovascular disorder. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The veteran has a lung disorder, currently manifested by an ill-defined density on chest X-ray, which was first manifested in service. 2. The veteran's presbyopia is a developmental disorder. 3. In service, the veteran was found to have primary alcoholism. 4. A chronic cardiovascular disorder other than hypertension was not manifested in service, and it is not demonstrated that the veteran now has a cardiovascular disorder other than hypertension. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. A chronic lung disorder, currently manifested by an ill-defined density on chest X-ray, was incurred in service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131 (formerly §§ 310, 331). 2. The veteran's presbyopia is a developmental disorder and not a disability for which service connection may be granted. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(c). 3. The veteran's alcoholism was not incurred in line of duty and may not be service connected. 38 U.S.C. § 105; 38 C.F.R. § 3.301. 4. The veteran does not have a cardiovascular disorder (other than hypertension) which was incurred or aggravated in service or is proximately due to his service-connected hypertension. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.310(a). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The veteran's claims are not inherently implausible and, hence, are well grounded within the meaning of 38 U.S.C. § 5107(a) (formerly § 3007(a)). We also found on review of the evidence that all development necessary to address the issues before us has been accomplished. Service medical records have been obtained and the appellant has been examined by the Department of Veterans Affairs (hereinafter VA). There is no indication that any evidence which might further his claim is outstanding. The "duty to assist," also mandated by § 5107(a), has been met. I. A Lung Disorder During service the veteran was seen for pulmonary problems and underwent evaluations following exposure to Otto fuel. Such exposure is well documented in the service medical records. He was found to have questionable restrictive lung disease. Spirometry in 1979 revealed a mild obstructive impairment which was demonstrated mainly by small airways disease. Chest X-rays showed an apparent increase in interstitial markings in both bases. There is no dispute that lung pathology was present in service. To establish service connection for a claimed disability, however, it must be demonstrated that such disability is currently present. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Here, the only pathology demonstrated on VA examination in 1989 is a small calcific density found on chest X-ray, described as unchanged from November 1987 (when the veteran was still on active duty). Hence, that pathology and only that pathology may be service connected at this time. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. II. Presbyopia The veteran is claiming service connection for visual loss. Presbyopia has been diagnosed. Presbyopia is hyperopia and impairment of vision due to advancing years or to old age, Dorland's Illustrated Medical Dictionary, (27th ed.) 1352, is a developmental disorder, and, as such, is not a disability for which service connection may be granted. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(c). Thus, it is irrelevant whether or not the veteran began noting a diminution in visual acuity during service. In the absence of a showing that the loss of vision resulted from pathology acquired in service rather than the developmental presbyopia, service connection for loss of visual acuity is not warranted. III. Alcoholism Direct service connection may be granted only when a disability was incurred or aggravated in line of duty and not the result of the veteran's own willful misconduct. 38 C.F.R. § 3.301(a). The simple drinking of alcoholic beverages is not of itself willful misconduct. The deliberate drinking of a known poisonous substance or under conditions which would raise a presumption to that effect is considered willful misconduct. If in the drinking of a beverage to enjoy its intoxicating effects intoxication results proximately and immediately in disability, the disability is considered the result of the person's willful misconduct. In the instant case, the veteran is claiming service connection for primary alcoholism. As is indicated above, primary alcoholism, the drinking of a beverage to enjoy its intoxicating effects, is misconduct. Accordingly, such errant behavior may not be service connected. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.1, 3.301. IV. A Cardiovascular Disorder As is indicated above, service connection is established by demonstrating that the claimed disability is present and is etiologically related to the veteran's service or his service-connected disabilities. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.310. Here, service connection has already been established for hypertension. We recognize that if coronary artery disease was established as being present, it would be service connected as a progression or complication of the hypertension. However, the clinical evidence of record does not demonstrate the presence of a heart disorder other than hypertension. Neither the borderline right atrial enlargement noted on VA examination nor the chest pains reported in service are, of themselves, diagnostic of, or reflect the presence of, a cardiovascular disability entity other than hypertension. Accordingly, service connection for a cardiovascular entity other than hypertension is not warranted. Any further clinical evidence that the veteran has cardiovascular pathology reflective of a disability entity other than hypertension would provide a basis for reopening of his claim. (NOTE: The section numbers of title 38, United States Code, were changed in 1991. The new section numbers are given above, followed, in parentheses, by "formerly §" and the old section numbers in effect prior to the 1991 revisions.) ORDER Service connection for a chronic lung disorder manifested by an ill-defined density in the lung on X-ray is granted. Service connection for presbyopia, alcoholism and a heart disorder is denied. BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C. 20420 * STEPHEN A. JONES BRUCE E. HYMAN *38 U.S.C. § 7102(a)(2)(A) (1991) (formerly § 4002(a)(2)(A)) permits a Board of Veterans' Appeals Section, upon direction of the Chairman of the Board, to proceed with the transaction of business without awaiting assignment of an additional Member to the Section when the Section is composed of fewer than three Members due to absence of a Member, vacancy on the Board or inability of the Member assigned to the Section to serve on the panel. The Chairman has directed that the Section proceed with the transaction of business, including the issuance of decisions, without awaiting the assignment of a third Member. NOTICE OF APPELLATE RIGHTS: Under 38 U.S.C. § 7266 (1991) (formerly § 4066), a decision of the Board of Veterans' (CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE) Appeals granting less than the complete benefit, or benefits, sought on appeal is appealable to the United States Court of Veterans Appeals within 120 days from the date of mailing of notice of the decision, provided that a Notice of Disagreement concerning an issue which was before the Board was filed with the agency of original jurisdiction on or after November 18, 1988. Veterans' Judicial Review Act, Pub. L. No. 100-687, § 402 (1988). The date which appears on the face of this decision constitutes the date of mailing and the copy of this decision which you have received is your notice of the action taken on your appeal by the Board of Veterans' Appeals.