Citation Nr: 0000869 Decision Date: 01/11/00 Archive Date: 01/27/00 DOCKET NO. 95-29 506 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Hartford, Connecticut THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for residuals of dental trauma for the purpose of receiving VA outpatient treatment. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD C. L. Wasser, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from August 1967 to August 1970. This case comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a July 1995 RO decision which denied service connection for a dental condition. The file shows the veteran is seeking service connection for residuals of dental trauma for the purpose of receiving VA outpatient dental treatment. A Board hearing was requested and scheduled, but the veteran failed to report for such hearing. In December 1998, the Board remanded the case to the RO for further evidentiary development. The case was returned to the Board in November 1999. FINDING OF FACT The veteran's claim, for service connection for residuals of dental trauma for the purpose of receiving VA outpatient dental treatment, is implausible. CONCLUSION OF LAW The veteran's claim, for service connection for residuals of dental trauma for the purpose of receiving VA outpatient dental treatment, is not well grounded. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION I. Factual Background The veteran served on active duty from August 1967 to August 1970. A review of his service medical and dental records shows that on his initial dental examination in July 1967, no teeth were listed as missing and his teeth were described as acceptable. On dental examination performed in August 1967, teeth 16, 17, 19, 20, 29, 30, and 32 were listed as missing. Subsequent service dental records note extensive treatment, including extractions, for dental disease such as cavities, but make no mention of dental trauma. A May 1970 consultation request referred the veteran for partial dentures. On separation medical examination in July 1970, teeth 1, 2, 3, 4, 16, 18, 19, 20, 29, and 30 were listed as missing. There are no post-service medical records relating to a dental condition. In February 1995, the veteran submitted a claim for service connection for residuals of in-service dental trauma. He said he was hit in the mouth while playing football, and a metal pin was placed in his tooth (the specific tooth was not identified). He stated that the tooth and pin eventually fell out and he still had them in his possession. By a statement dated in August 1995, the veteran asserted that he wanted replacement of a tooth (the specific tooth was not identified) which was loosened by a blow to the mouth during service, and treated with placement of a metal pin. In December 1998, the Board remanded the case to the RO in order to obtain information from the veteran regarding the exact location in his mouth of the missing tooth, and regarding any post-service dental treatment. The RO was also asked to contact the veteran and ask him to provide the tooth and metal pin for examination by a VA dentist. By a letter to the veteran dated in February 1999, the RO requested that he provide information regarding the exact location in his mouth of the missing tooth, and regarding any post-service dental treatment. The RO also requested that he submit the missing tooth. The veteran did not respond to this letter. A June 1999 memorandum from a VA Medical Center indicates that the veteran failed to report for a scheduled VA examination, and that attempts to contact him were unsuccessful. By a memorandum dated in November 1999, the veteran's representative indicated that he was unable to contact the veteran. II. Analysis Treatable carious teeth, replaceable missing teeth, dental or alveolar abscesses, and periodontal disease will be considered service-connected solely for the purpose of establishing eligibility for outpatient dental treatment. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1712 (West 1991 & Supp. 1999); 38 C.F.R. § 3.381(a) (1999). The rating activity will consider each defective or missing tooth and each disease of the teeth and periodontal tissues separately to determine whether the condition was incurred or aggravated in line of duty during active service. When applicable, the rating activity will determine whether the condition is due to combat or other in- service trauma, or whether the veteran was interned as a prisoner-of-war. 38 C.F.R. § 3.381(b) (1999). [The foregoing regulatory provisions were previously found in 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.381, 4.149 (1998).] The veteran seeks VA outpatient dental treatment on the basis of his claim that he has a dental condition as the result of trauma during service. If a dental condition is due to a combat wound or other service trauma, the veteran is entitled to VA outpatient dental treatment (for the specific dental condition due to trauma) as often as may be found necessary, regardless of when an application for such treatment is filed. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1712(a)(1)(C); 38 C.F.R. § 17.161(c). (There are other categories of entitlement to VA outpatient dental treatment; none is claimed by the veteran or suggested by the facts of this case. See 38 U.S.C.A. § 1712; 38 C.F.R. § 17.161.) The veteran's claim raises the threshold question of whether he has met his initial burden of submitting evidence to show that his claim is well grounded, meaning plausible; if he has not done so, there is no VA duty to assist him in developing the claim, and the claim must be denied. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a); Grivois v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 136 (1994). In this regard, the Board notes that the veteran failed to report for a scheduled VA examination, and thus his claim must be considered based on the evidence of record. 38 C.F.R. § 3.655 (1999). In order for a service connection claim to be well grounded, it must be supported by competent evidence of a current disability (medical evidence of a diagnosis), competent evidence of incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury in service (medical evidence or, in some circumstances, lay evidence), and competent evidence showing causality between service and a current disability (medical evidence). Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498 (1995); Grivois, supra; Grottveit v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 91 (1993). For a claim for service connection to be plausible or well grounded, it must be supported by competent evidence, not just allegations. Tirpak v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 609 (1992). Although the veteran alleges that one unidentified tooth was loosened by trauma during an in-service football game, the service medical and dental records are entirely negative for evidence of trauma to the teeth or mouth, and no residuals of dental trauma were noted on the 1970 separation medical examination. The separation examination noted 10 missing teeth (7 were missing on dental examination performed shortly after entrance into military service), and such teeth were all located in the sides and back of the mouth. The service medical records do not attribute missing teeth or another dental condition to service trauma. There are no post-service medical records reflecting treatment for a dental condition (including any missing teeth). The veteran's claim is only supported by his own general assertions; but a claim must be supported by evidence, not just allegations, to be well grounded. Tirpak, supra. He has not submitted competent medical evidence linking a current dental condition to service trauma. Caluza, supra. The veteran has stated that he has a missing tooth due to in- service dental trauma. As a layman, however, he has no competence to give a medical opinion on the diagnosis or etiology of a condition. Espiritu v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 492 (1992). In the absence of competent medical evidence to link any current dental condition to alleged service trauma, the claim, for service connection for residuals of dental trauma for the purpose of receiving VA outpatient dental treatment, is implausible and must be denied as not well grounded. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a); Woodson v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 352 (1995), aff'd 87 F.3d 1304 (1996). ORDER Service connection for residuals of dental trauma for the purpose of receiving VA outpatient dental treatment is denied. L. W. TOBIN Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals