Citation Nr: 0005810 Decision Date: 03/03/00 Archive Date: 03/14/00 DOCKET NO. 98-01 951 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Cleveland, Ohio THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for low back strain with degenerative joint disease. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: The American Legion WITNESSES AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant and Spouse ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD John R. Pagano, Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran had active military service from November 1968 to November 1972. This matter arises from a rating decision rendered in December 1996 by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Cleveland, Ohio, which denied the benefit now sought on appeal. Following compliance with the procedural requirements set forth in 38 U.S.C.A. § 7105 (West 1991), the case was forwarded to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) for appellate consideration. FINDING OF FACT No probative evidence has been submitted that would tend to link the veteran's low back strain with degenerative joint disease to his military service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The claim of entitlement to service connection for low back strain with degenerative joint disease is not well grounded. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The veteran offers a number of contentions in support of his claim of entitlement to service connection for low back strain with degenerative joint disease. At a personal hearing conducted in April 1998, the veteran testified that he injured his back in either September or October 1972, while participating in a 5BX Program. He testified further that during the program, he was playing basketball and was knocked to the ground, injuring his lower back. He stated that he sought medical treatment the next day, and that he remained out of work for approximately four days. He claims that this trauma is what gave rise to his current back disability. See 38 U.S.C.A. § 1110 (West 1991). Alternatively, the veteran argues that VA has not met its duty to assist him in the development of his claim because it has been unable to obtain all of his service medical records. As a threshold matter, however, one claiming entitlement to VA benefits has the burden of submitting evidence sufficient to justify a belief that a given claim is well grounded. Id. "[T]he [VA] benefits system requires more than just an allegation"; a claimant must submit supporting evidence sufficient to justify a belief by a fair and impartial individual that a given claim is plausible. Tirpak v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 609, 610-611 (1992). To establish that a given claim for service connection is well grounded, the evidence must demonstrate, among other things, that a disability either was incurred in or aggravated by military service. Cf. Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 469 (1994). Alternatively, a veteran may establish a well-grounded claim for service connection under the chronicity provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b) (1999), when the evidence, regardless of date, shows that a veteran had a chronic condition in service or during an applicable presumptive period, and that the same condition continues to exist. Such evidence must be medical unless the condition at issue is a type as to which, under current case law, lay observation is considered competent to demonstrate its existence. In addition, a claim may be well grounded if the evidence shows continuity of symptomatology subsequent to military service. See Savage v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 488, 495 (1997). The question presented is whether the veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for low back strain with degenerative joint disease meets the foregoing requirements. The veteran's service medical records are not available. However, a copy of the report of a physical examination conducted in July 1972 in anticipation of the veteran's separation from military service is of record. This indicates that his spine was normal at that time, and that the veteran had experienced low back pain due to sleeping habits which was relieved when the veteran changed position. Aside from the veteran's subjective complaints, no physical abnormalities were observed. It is significant to note here that the veteran stated at his personal hearing that this examination took place following the injury he sustained to his lower back while playing basketball. The fact that this examination was negative regarding the veteran's lower back would tend to indicate that the injuries he sustained were acute and transitory in nature. In addition, during his testimony, the veteran indicated that he reinjured his back in 1981. As a final matter, the Board observes that the first evidence of medical treatment associated with the veteran's low back is reflected in a medical report dated in March 1981. This indicates that the veteran injured his back while lifting his girl friend one week earlier, and that he had experienced some back pain since that time. The report also referred to an old back injury sustained by the veteran during military service, but otherwise did not indicate any relationship between the two. The next evidence of a low back disability is contained in a private medical report dated in June 1992. This indicates that the veteran complained of back pain after pulling weeds. Lumbosacral sprain was diagnosed. In effect, there is no medical evidence that relates the veteran's currently diagnosed low back strain with degenerative joint disease to an incident of his military service. In this regard, the Board is cognizant of the testimony offered by the veteran and his spouse, as well as the statement offered by his father dated in June 1998. However, these individuals are lay persons. They do not possess the medical expertise required to establish a nexus between the disability currently diagnosed and an injury sustained by the veteran during military service. See Espiritu v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 492, 494-495 (1992). Accordingly, service connection for low back strain with degenerative joint disease is not warranted. The Board views the foregoing discussion as sufficient to inform the veteran of the elements necessary to, but currently missing from, his claim if it is to be well grounded. See Robinette v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 69, 77-78 (1995). ORDER Because it is not well grounded, service connection for low back strain with degenerative joint disease is denied. WARREN W. RICE, JR. Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals