Citation Nr: 9822470 Decision Date: 07/24/98 Archive Date: 08/03/98 DOCKET NO. 97-21 519 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Muskogee, Oklahoma THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for a neck disability. INTRODUCTION The veteran had active service from July 1993 to November 1995. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 1996 decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Muskogee, Oklahoma. CONTENTIONS OF APPELLANT ON APPEAL It is contended that the veteran was treated twice, during active service, for complaints of neck pain. It is asserted that the veteran continues to experience neck pain. DECISION OF THE BOARD The Board, in accordance with the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 7104 (West 1991 & Supp. 1998), has reviewed and considered all of the evidence and material of record in the veteran's claims file. Based on its review of the relevant evidence in this matter, and for the following reasons and bases, it is the decision of the Board that the veteran has not presented evidence sufficient to justify a belief by a fair and impartial individual that the claim of entitlement to service connection for a neck disability is well grounded. FINDING OF FACT The claim of entitlement to service connection for a neck disability is not plausible. CONCLUSION OF LAW The claim of entitlement to service connection for a neck disability is not well grounded. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The threshold question is whether the veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for a neck disability is well grounded under 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a). A well-grounded claim is a plausible claim which is meritorious on its own or capable of substantiation. Murphy v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 78, 81 (1990). There must be more than a mere allegation, the claim must be accompanied by evidence that justifies a belief by a fair and impartial individual that the claim is plausible. Tirpak v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 609, 611 (1992). Moreover, where a determinative issue involves a diagnosis or medical causation, competent medical evidence to the effect that the claim is plausible is required. Grottveit v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 91, 93 (1993); Espiritu v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 492, 494-95 (1992). In order for a claim to be considered well grounded, there must be evidence both of a current disability and of an etiological relationship between that disability and service. Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498, 506 (1995); Brammer v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 223, 225 (1992); Rabideau v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 141, 143 (1992). Service connection may be established for disability resulting from personal injury suffered or disease contracted in line of duty, or for aggravation of a preexisting injury suffered or disease contracted in line of duty. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1110 (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (1997). The law also provides that 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. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). The veteran has not indicated that any records other than service medical records exist regarding any treatment concerning his neck. The service medical records have been obtained and reports of VA examinations have been associated with the record. See Bell v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 611 (1992); Murincsak v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 363 (1992). The report of the veteran's March 1993 service entrance examination is silent for complaint, finding, or treatment with respect to the veteran's neck. The veteran's service medical records refer to various complaints relating to the veteran's back, but the only service medical record that makes reference to the veteran's neck is dated in June 1995. This record reflects that the veteran reported that he had been seen the prior Monday for complaints relating to neck pain as well. The assessment was muscle strain in the posterior occipital area. The report of the veteran's November 1995 service separation examination and the veteran's report of medical assessment reflects that the veteran reported intermittent episodes of trapezius strain and a history of intermittent back musculoskeletal sprain was noted. The reports of March 1997 VA examinations and VA X-ray reflects that X-rays of the cervical spine were normal. The veteran complained of continuous pain in his neck since 1995. Examination of the neck was normal. The diagnosis was no neck injury or lesion identified and it was noted that the veteran did have some occipital myalgia that was intermittent without further objective findings and was not present at the time of examination. In order for the veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for a neck disability to be well grounded he must submit medical evidence indicating that he currently has this disability and that it is related to his active service. The veteran asserts that he was seen twice during active service for complaints relating to his neck and service medical records reflect that on the occasion it was reported he was seen the veteran reported that he had been seen on the Monday before that time. However, there is no competent medical evidence that reflects that the veteran had chronic disability of the neck during service and there is no competent medical evidence that indicates that the veteran currently has chronic disability of the neck. Competent medical evidence reflects that there is no current disability of the neck. The veteran's statements are presumed credible for purposes of this decision, but he, as a lay person, is not qualified to establish a medical diagnosis or show a medical etiology merely by his own assertion, as such matters require medical expertise. See Grottveit and Espiritu. The Board therefore concludes that, without the requisite competent medical evidence establishing that the veteran currently has chronic disability of the neck that is related to active service, the claim of entitlement to service connection for a neck disability is not well grounded. Caluza. The Board views its discussion as sufficient to inform the veteran of the elements necessary to complete his claim for disability compensation for the above discussed disability. Robinette v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 69 (1995). ORDER Evidence of a well-grounded claim for entitlement to service connection for a neck disability not having been submitted, the appeal is denied. MILO H. HAWLEY Acting Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals NOTICE OF APPELLATE RIGHTS: Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7266 (West 1991 & Supp. 1998), a decision of the Board of Veterans' 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, 102 Stat. 4105, 4122 (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. - 2 -