BVA9500724 DOCKET NO. 93-07 238 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in San Diego, California THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for the cause of the veteran's death. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Paralyzed Veterans of America, Inc. ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Patrick J. Costello, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran had active military service from December 1942 to February 1949. This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (hereinafter the Board) on appeal from an April 1992 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO), in San Diego, California, which denied the appellant's claim for service connection for the cause of the veteran's death. CONTENTIONS OF APPELLANT ON APPEAL During World War II, the veteran received a shrapnel wound in the lower left leg . The shrapnel wound healed satisfactorily; however, the damage to the left femur required extensive surgery including loss of part of the bone. Upon application for VA compensation benefits, he was granted an 80 percent rating for the residuals of said wound. He also received special monthly compensation because he lost the use of his left foot. The veteran continued to receive these benefits until his death at the age of 75 on December 19, 1991. The veteran's widow has now applied for VA widow's benefits claiming that her husband's death due to arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease was due to or caused by his service- connected leg injury. Alternatively, she claims that when the veteran obtained treatment from the VA, he received "tainted" blood which led to kidney and heart conditions. Therefore, she asks that the Board review the record and find that the RO committed error when it disallowed her claim for benefits. DECISION OF THE BOARD The Board, in accordance with the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 7104 (West 1991), 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 issue of service connection for the cause of the veteran's death is not well-grounded. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Service medical records are negative for any findings of arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease. 2. Medical records do not show a diagnosis or treatment for contaminated blood given to the veteran for treatment of his wounds incurred in World War II. 3. Per the final medical report, the veteran had no know history of cardiovascular problems or complications. 4. The widow's contention that the service-connected disorder, the residuals thereof, and the treatment therefor, played a part in the veteran's death is unsupported by medical evidence. CONCLUSION OF LAW The claim for entitlement to service connection for the cause of the veteran's death is not well-grounded. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1101, 1110, 1112, 1113, 5107(a) (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307, 3.309 (1994). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION The appellant appeals the Rating Decision of April 1992, which denied service connection for the cause of the veteran's death. In essence, the RO stated that the veteran's death due to arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease was not due to or caused by his service-connected leg injury, or the residuals thereof. Yet, before the topic of service connection may be discussed, the initial question for resolution in this case is whether the appellant has submitted a well-grounded claim in accordance with 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107 (West 1991), and Murphy v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 78 (1990). Upon review of the claims file, we find that this requirement has not been satisfied. Per 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107 (West 1991), and subsequently Tirpak v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 609 (1992), and Grivois v. Brown, 6 Vet.App. 136 (1994), a well-grounded claim requires more than just a mere allegation. The veteran died from arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease. In order to file a well-grounded claim, the appellant must submit supporting evidence that would justify the belief that the veteran's death from heart disease was etiologically related to his service-connected leg condition or was caused by a separate disorder that originated during service. The record does not contain any objective evidence supporting the appellant's claims. There is no medical evidence or record linking the veteran's heart disease to the veteran's period of service or his service-connected disability. Hence, statements by the appellant are speculative and would not "justify a belief by a fair and impartial individual that the claim is well- grounded." Ibid. While we do not doubt that she is sincere in her belief that the veteran's left leg disability caused the arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease, she is not qualified as a layperson to offer such an opinion. See Espiritu v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 492 (1992). Mere contentions of the appellant without supporting evidence do not constitute a well-grounded claim. Field v. Derwinski, U.S. Vet. App. No. 90-933 (Dec. 2, 1991); King v. Brown, 5 Vet.App. 19 (1993). We further note that during the veteran's lifetime, he never applied for service connection for his arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The appellant also averred that her husband's cardiovascular disease was caused by contaminated blood he received while being treated for his leg condition. Yet, despite the appellant's claims, she has not proffered any evidence that would support her contentions. She has not provided medical evidence showing first that the veteran suffered from a blood condition due to contaminated blood. Secondly, she has failed to offer any evidence indicating that the veteran's arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease was caused by contaminated blood. Thus, we find that appellant has not submitted a well-grounded claim in accordance with the 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107 (West 1991). In two recent decisions, Grottveit v. Brown, 5 Vet.App. 92 (1993), and Grivois v. Brown, 6 Vet.App. 136 (1994), the United States Court of Veterans Appeals (the Court) has held that claims for service connection denied on the merits by the Board and, preceding the Board's decisions, by the Regional Office, were not well-grounded, and that "the [Board] and the Regional Office erred in not so deciding the claim." Grottveit, 5 Vet.App. at 92. The governing law, 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991), [R]eflects a policy that implausible claims should not consume the limited resources of the VA and force into even greater backlog and delay those claims which -- as well- grounded -- require adjudication. . . Attentiveness to this threshold issue is, by law, not only for the Board but for the initial adjudicators, for it is their duty to avoid adjudicating implausible claims at the expense of delaying well-grounded ones. Grivois, 6 Vet.App. at 139. The Court expressed its concern that a decision on the merits, if deemed final, could constitute an unwarranted impediment to the appellant should he seek to reopen the claim because new and material evidence would be required to reopen. The Court deemed it appropriate, where the Board denied on the merits a claim that was not well-grounded, to "recognize the nullity of the prior decisions and allow appellant to begin, if he can, on a clean slate." Grottveit, 5 Vet.App. at 93; Grivois, 6 Vet.App. at 140. In both cases, the Court vacated the Board's decision and remanded with instructions to vacate the decision of the RO. Id.; Grivois, 6 Vet.App. at 141. In view of the clear direction given by the Court, it is imperative that finality in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 3.104 (1994), not attach to the rating decision of April 20, 1992, and November 24, 1992, as regards this claim. ORDER A well-grounded claim for service connection for the cause of the veteran's death due to or as a result of the veteran's service- connected shrapnel wound to the left leg, and the residuals thereof, not having being submitted, the claim is dismissed, and the rating decisions of April 20, 1992, and November 24, 1992, insofar as the claim for entitlement to service connection for the cause of the veteran's death is concerned, are vacated. (CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE) JACK W. BLASINGAME Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals The Board of Veterans' Appeals Administrative Procedures Improvement Act, Pub. L. No. 103-271, § 6, 108 Stat. 740, ___ (1994), permits a proceeding instituted before the Board to be assigned to an individual member of the Board for a determination. This proceeding has been assigned to an individual member of the Board. NOTICE OF APPELLATE RIGHTS: Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7266 (West 1991), 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 (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.