BVA9503909 DOCKET NO. 93-08 202 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for a back disability. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: The American Legion WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD M. Auer, Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from July 1963 to July 1965. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 1992 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, which denied service connection for a back disability was denied. CONTENTIONS OF APPELLANT ON APPEAL The veteran contends that he sustained an injury to his back following a helicopter crash in Vietnam on July 1, 1964. He claims that he was unable to walk in an erect position for three to four months following this crash. He reports that X-rays were taken by medical authorities in Saigon, Vietnam; however, he has been unable to retrieve these records. He asserts that he was informed that his service medical records had been burned in a fire and were unavailable. Finally, the veteran has submitted a list of three individuals who he claims were passengers on the helicopter that crashed in July 1964. 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 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's claim for service connection for a back disorder is not well grounded and the appeal is dismissed. FINDING OF FACT A back disorder related to service has not been demonstrated. CONCLUSION OF LAW The claim for service connection for a back disorder is not well grounded and is dismissed. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1110, 5107, 7105 (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(1994). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION Generally, under 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1110 and 1131, the veteran must have a disability resulting from service in order to establish entitlement to compensation. The law requires that a veteran shall have the burden of submitting evidence sufficient to justify a belief by a fair and impartial individual that the claim is well grounded. See 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a). The United States Court of Veterans Appeals (Court) has to find a "well- grounded claim" as a plausible claim, one that is meritorious on its own or capable of substantiation. See Murphy v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 78, 81 (1990). With these legal criteria in mind, the Board will now evaluate the veteran's claim for service connection for a back disorder. A review of the veteran's service medical record shows that upon a pre-induction examination, conducted in December 1961, the veteran's spine was normal. A treatment note, dated July 10, 1964, shows that on July 1, 1964, the veteran was in a helicopter crash near Vinh Long. At that time, he complained of pain in the left chest. A X-ray examination report, dated in July 1964, shows that the vertebrae, shoulder and soft tissues were within normal limits. The veteran was seen on an outpatient basis several times prior to his discharge from service; however, there were no complaints or findings reported that related to the veteran's spine. A separation examination report, dated May 1965, shows no complaints or abnormal findings referable to the spine. The veteran has alleged that he received treatment after service from Allegheny General Hospital and Uniontown Hospital. Treatment notes from Uniontown Hospital, dated in June 1990, show the veteran was treated for complaints not associated with the current claim on appeal. In a letter from Allegheny General Hospital, dated in May 1992, it was indicated that no records relating to the veteran had been found. The veteran testified before a hearing officer at the RO in October 1992. At that time, he related the circumstances of the helicopter crash in Vietnam. He stated that he had been unable to walk in an upright position for approximately three to four months after the crash (Tr. at 4). He also reported that he had been X-rayed at a clinic in Saigon (Tr. at 4). The veteran indicated that nothing much had happened regarding his back between the years of 1965 and 1983. He also reported that he sought no medical treatment for his back following discharge from service until 1983 (Tr. at 7). In January 1993, the Board received a letter from the veteran regarding his claim. At that time, he listed three men who had been in the helicopter crash with him in July 1964. The veteran was examined by the VA in May 1992. At that time, he complained of chronic lower back pain described as constant and located in the bilateral regions of the lumbar spine. Following a physical examination, the diagnosis was history of chronic, mild lower back pain, likely a lumbosacral strain pattern. The examiner noted that the veteran did relate some history of some right leg pain at times with heavy lifting. It was thought that these complaints represented some element of nerve compression, but the examiner stated that it was more likely to represent a simple straining pattern with arthritic pain, as well. VA regulations provide, in pertinent part, 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. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). Furthermore, if a chronic disease is shown in service, subsequent manifestations of the same chronic disease at any later date are service connected unless clearly related to intercurrent causes. A showing of a chronic disease requires a combination of manifestations sufficient to identify the disease entity and sufficient observation to establish chronicity at the time. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b). The evidence of record does not show that the veteran had a back disorder or complaints related to a back disorder in service. On the contrary, the evidence demonstrates that the veteran developed a back disorder many years after he was discharged from service. In fact, the first medical evidence of a back disorder was dated in May 1992. The Board concedes the fact that the veteran was a passenger in a helicopter that crashed in June or July of 1964 in Vietnam. However, the veteran's statements indicating a relationship between his current back complaints and the crash occurring in service are not persuasive. The Court has held that lay persons, although competent to provide an account of symptoms, are not qualified "to offer evidence that requires medical knowledge," such as a diagnosis as to the cause of a disability. Espiritu v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 492, 494-5 (1992). Moreover, the record is devoid of any medical evidence or opinion establishing a link between any incident in service and the veteran's back disability. Under these circumstances, it is the judgment of the Board that the veteran has not met his burden of submitting evidence sufficient to justify a belief by a fair and impartial individual that the claim is well grounded under 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a). Accordingly, his claim for service connection for a back disorder is dismissed. See 38 U.S.C.A. § 7105(d)(5); Boeck v. Brown, 6 Vet.App. 14, 17 (1993). ORDER The claim for service connection for a back disorder is dismissed. JACQUELINE E. MONROE 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.