BVA9508349 DOCKET NO. 93-14 062 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Milwaukee, Wisconsin THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss. 2. Entitlement to an effective date earlier than February 4, 1992, for service-connection and compensation for postoperative residuals of a right inguinal hernia. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Wisconsin Department of Veterans Affairs ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Bernard T. DoMinh, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from October 1954 to October 1959. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 1992 rating decision by the Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Regional Office (RO) of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), which denied the veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and for an effective date earlier than February 4, 1992, for service-connection and compensation for postoperative residuals of a right inguinal hernia. CONTENTIONS OF APPELLANT ON APPEAL The veteran contends that his bilateral defective hearing is related to his exposure to excessive noise from heavy equipment and artillery during service, or that his hearing loss is due to a service episode in which he had pressure in his ears while riding an airplane and his ears "popped" after landing. He further contends that service connection and compensation for postoperative residuals of a right inguinal hernia should be effective with his 1959 separation from service, since the condition has existed since then and because he filed, or attempted to file, a claim for service connection shortly after service when he applied for VA dental treatment. 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 veteran has not submitted well-grounded claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss, and for an effective date earlier than February 4, 1992, for service connection and compensation for postoperative residuals of a right inguinal hernia; thus, the claims must be dismissed. FINDING OF FACT The veteran has not submitted evidence of plausible claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss, and for an effective date earlier than February 4, 1992 for service connection and compensation for postoperative residuals of a right inguinal hernia. CONCLUSION OF LAW The veteran's claims (for service connection for bilateral hearing loss, and for an effective date earlier than February 4, 1992 for service connection and compensation for postoperative residuals of a right inguinal hernia) are not well grounded. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS I. Factual Background The veteran served on active duty in the Army from October 1954 to October 1959. His military occupational specialties included "field commo crewman" and combat engineer. He had overseas service in Europe and did not serve in combat. The veteran's service medical records show that, at a July 1953 pre-induction examination and at an October 1954 induction examination, his hearing was found to be 15/15 (normal), bilaterally, on voice testing, with clinically normal ears and eardrums. At an August 1956 general medical examination, he reported that he had no medical history of ear problems and was found to have normal ears and eardrums, with 15/15 hearing in both ears. The veteran's service medical records show that a right inguinal hernia was noted in November 1957. In January 1958 a hernioplasty was performed to treat this condition. Subsequent records show that his recovery from surgery was uneventful. An outpatient service medical record, dated in March 1958, shows that the veteran reported to sick call, complaining of having trouble hearing with his right ear. Examination revealed a mildly retracted right eardrum. The diagnostic impression was acute and nonsuppurative otitis media, for which the veteran was prescribed conventional treatment with nose and eardrops. An August 1959 separation examination of the veteran showed that he had normal ears and drums, with 15/15 hearing, bilaterally. VA documents, dated from December 1959 to May 1960, contain information dealing exclusively with the veteran's application for outpatient dental treatment. Audiograms, reportedly from Ft. McCoy, Wisconsin, and related to civilian employment, dated in July 1990, March 1991, and January 1992, show the veteran then had bilateral hearing loss. The veteran claimed service connection for bilateral hearing loss and a right inguinal hernia repair in a VA Form 21-526 (Veteran's Application for Compensation or Pension) which he signed and dated in July 1991. On the form, the veteran indicated he had not previously filed a claim for VA compensation, but had previously claimed dental or outpatient treatment. The claims form and related documents were submitted to the RO by the veteran's representative (with a cover memorandum dated February 4, 1992), and the claim and documents were stamped as having been received by the RO on February 4, 1992. During a March 1992 VA examination, the veteran reported that he was regularly exposed to high levels of engine noise during his active service, and that he did not use hearing protection during that time. He reported he first noticed that he had decreased hearing ability in 1958. Audiological examination revealed moderate sensorineural hearing loss from 3,000 hertz through 8,000 hertz in his left ear. Testing of the right ear revealed mild, mixed hearing loss from 250 hertz through 1,500 hertz, and moderate sensorineural hearing loss at 4,000 hertz. Tinnitus was also noted. After earwax was removed, the ears and drums were normal on clinical evaluation. Examination of residuals of his right inguinal hernia repair showed that he had slight tenderness in the old surgical area, but no hernia was perceived on touch. The veteran was diagnosed with hearing loss, and status-post right inguinal hernia repair with complaints of chronic pain. In a June 1992 decision, the RO granted the veteran service connection for residuals of a right inguinal hernia repair and awarded him a 10 percent disability rating, effective from February 4, 1992. Service connection for hearing loss was denied. A December 1992 VA outpatient treatment record notes that the veteran was applying for service connection for hearing loss. He related that he had decreased hearing since a service incident in which he had an earache, was riding on an airplane, and blew his nose with resultant loss of right ear hearing. The diagnostic impression was subjective hearing loss of the right ear. In his substantive appeal, the veteran reported that shortly before the time he sought treatment for otitis media during service (in March 1958), he was flying on a plane to Europe when he felt pressure in his ear. He said that when the plane landed he blew his nose and suddenly experienced a popping sensation in his ear. He claimed that from that time onward, he noticed that he had diminished hearing. He reported that he never had an audiogram during service, and that he had served with a combat engineer unit during active service, and was exposed to the noise of equipment being operated and artillery being fired, during which times he did not have the benefit of hearing protectors. The veteran also argued that service connection and compensation for a right inguinal hernia should be effective from the time of his 1959 separation from service. He said the condition had existed since service. He alleged that he filed, or attempted to file, a claim for service connection for the hernia condition at the same time he applied for VA dental treatment, shortly after service, but that VA personnel either lost that claim or discouraged him from properly filing the claim. II. Analysis The threshold question is whether the veteran has met his initial burden of submitting evidence that his claims are well grounded, meaning plausible. If he has not done so, there is no VA duty to assist him in developing the claims, and the claims must be dismissed. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a); Murphy v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 78 (1990). A. Service Connection for Bilateral Hearing Loss The veteran claims service connection for bilateral hearing loss, asserting that the condition was incurred in service (see 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303) as the result of noise exposure or an incident in which he had increased ear pressure while flying, blew his nose, and lost his hearing. The only reference to hearing problems, found in the 1954-1959 service medical records, is from March 1958 when the veteran had a complaint of trouble hearing in the right ear associated with acute otitis media. The condition was treated and evidently cured, and there is no evidence of any ear problem or hearing loss thereafter; the ears and hearing were normal at the 1959 service separation examination. There is no medical evidence of hearing loss after service until the 1990's, when bilateral hearing loss was found on private and VA examinations. For a claim to be well grounded it must be supported by evidence, not just allegations. Tirpak v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 609 (1992). The veteran's assertions on the causes of his hearing loss are not cognizable evidence since, as a layman, 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). Chronic hearing loss in this case is first shown some three decades after service. Under such circumstances, for the claim to be well grounded the veteran would have to submit competent medical evidence of causality, linking the hearing loss to remote events of service. Grivois v. Brown, 6 Vet.App. 136 (1994). No such evidence has been submitted, and therefor the claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss is implausible and must de dismissed as not well grounded. B. Effective Date Earlier than February 4, 1992 for Service Connection and Compensation for Postoperative Residuals of a Right Inguinal Hernia The RO granted service connection, and a 10 percent rating for the right hernia condition, effective February 4, 1992, being the date of VA receipt of the original compensation claim filed years after service. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5110(a); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400(b)(2). This is obviously the correct effective date unless the veteran filed an earlier claim. He alleges that he filed, or attempted to file, a claim for service connection for the hernia condition within the year after service, at the time he was applying for VA dental treatment; and thus, he argues, service connection and compensation should be effective the day after his 1959 separation from service. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5110(b)(1); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400(b)(2). The veteran has made but a bare allegation of having filed, or attempting to file, for service connection within the year after service. The evidence on file shows no such claim, formal or informal, at the time the veteran applied for VA dental treatment shortly after service, or at any time prior to the submission of the claim on February 4, 1992. Of note is the fact that the veteran, on the February 4, 1992 claim, denied ever having filed a previous claim for compensation. In any event, the veteran's claim for an earlier effective date rests on a mere allegation, unsupported by any evidence; thus, the claim is implausible and must be dismissed as not well grounded. Tirpak, supra. ORDER The claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss is dismissed as not well grounded. The claim for an effective date earlier than February 4, 1992, for service connection and compensation for postoperative residuals of a right inguinal hernia, is dismissed as not well grounded. L. W. TOBIN 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.