BVA9502518 DOCKET NO. 93-09 171 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Huntington, West Virginia THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for hypertension. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD E. A. Artman, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from May 1954 to May 1956. In addition, he performed service in the United States Merchant Marines from December 18, 1945, to March 28, 1954, and after his period of active service. Thus, his service in the Merchant Marines does not qualify as active service for purposes of eligibility to receive VA benefits. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.7(x) (1993). This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) on appeal from rating decisions issued in October and December from the Huntington, West Virginia, Regional Office (RO). These decisions denied a claim of service connection for hypertension. CONTENTIONS OF APPELLANT ON APPEAL The veteran contends that he should be granted service connection for his hypertension because it was first detected during his active service in the Army, and because he received treatment for it within one year of discharge from this service. 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 preponderance of the evidence is against the claim of service connection. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. When the veteran was hospitalized for an unrelated condition before service in November and December 1949, he exhibited blood pressure readings of 120/90, 150/70 and 148/96. 2. A report of an April 1956 separation examination shows that the veteran had a blood pressure reading of 138/80, but noted no blood pressure abnormality. In a signed statement of May 1956, just prior to service, the veteran indicated that there had been no change in his physical condition since the April 1956 examination. 3. A September 1958 United States Public Health Service treatment report contains a clinical impression of mild hypertension with a blood pressure reading of 155/100, and discloses that the veteran had stated that he had had problems with nosebleeds and had been told in the past that he had high blood pressure. 4. The medical evidence of record demonstrates that the veteran received treatment for his hypertension on a continuous basis from 1958 to 1992. 5. No competent evidence has been submitted to show that the veteran's hypertension is the result of disease or injury in service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The veteran's hypertension is not shown to have been incurred in or aggravated by service; nor may it be presumed to have been incurred in service. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1101, 1110, 1112, 1113, 1131, 1137, 5107, 7104 (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(a), 3.307, 3.309 (1993). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION I The veteran has asserted that his high blood pressure was first detected during his active service in the Army and that, shortly thereafter, he was placed on medication for this condition. On two instances, the veteran has asserted that he also received treatment for hypertension beginning in December 1956, a few months prior to his discharge from the Army. See VA Form 9, Appeal to Board of Veterans' Appeals (received by the RO in March 1993); VA Form 21-4138, Statement in Support of Claim (accepted by the RO as a notice of disagreement in January 1993). A review of the veteran's claims file reveals that most of his service medical records could not be obtained by the RO because they were presumed to have been destroyed in a fire which occurred at the National Personnel Records Center. Nevertheless, the file does contain a copy of the veteran's April 1956 separation examination report. This report shows that the veteran had a blood pressure reading of 138/80 at the time of that examination. No diagnosis of high blood pressure was made. In a signed May 1956 statement (prepared just prior to separation from service and attached to the separation examination report), the veteran stated that there had been no change in his physical condition since the previous examination. In addition, the record contains treatment records from the United States Public Health Service, which demonstrate that the veteran received treatment for hypertension from this service from 1958 to 1968. The earliest treatment record is dated in September 1958, and contains an impression of mild hypertension. The blood pressure reading was 155/100. At that time, it was noted that the veteran had stated that he occasionally wakened in the morning to discover that he had had a nosebleed. He was also noted as stating that a physician had told him on a past occasion that he had high blood pressure. Copies of treatment records received from a private physician, S. L. Magunia, M.D., document that the veteran continued to have elevated blood pressure from 1969 to 1992 (and indicate that treatment by Dr. Magunia commenced in 1980). At a May 1992 appointment, the veteran's blood pressure was recorded as being 170/78 on the right and 190/82 on the left in a sitting position. Ten minutes later, it was recorded as being 148/70 on the right and 152/70 on the left in the same position. Treatment consisted of a continuation of prescribed medications, which, presumably, were provided in order to control the veteran's hypertension. Records submitted in connection with the appeal also include copies of documents dealing with a period of hospitalization in November and December 1949 when the veteran was treated for an unrelated condition. Blood pressure readings of 120/90, 150/70 and 148/96 were recorded therein. II Before addressing the issue of service connection on the merits, the Board notes that it finds the veteran's claim to be well grounded for purposes of 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991). That is to say, the veteran has submitted a claim which is plausible, as supported by competent medical evidence to that effect. See Grottveit v. Brown, 5 Vet.App. 91 (1993). Furthermore, the Board finds that VA has met its duty under § 5107(a) to assist the veteran in the development of all the facts pertinent to his well- grounded claim. See Grottveit at 93. Additional sources of development are not indicated in the Board's opinion. Thus, the claim of service connection has been developed to the fullest extent possible for purpose of appellate review. By law, service connection is granted for disability which is the result of an injury or disease incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1101, 1110, 1131 (West 1991). In addition, service connection may be established for a chronic disease, including hypertension, which is shown to have become manifest to a degree of 10 percent or more within one year following a period of active service. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1112, 1113, 1137 (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307, 3.309 (1993). The disabling condition for which the veteran seeks a service connection must be considered on the basis of the places, types and circumstances of his service as shown by service records, his medical records, and all other pertinent medical and lay evidence. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). Where, after careful consideration of all procurable evidence, a reasonable doubt arises regarding service origin of a claimed condition, such doubt will be resolved in favor of the veteran. A reasonable doubt may be said to arise where the evidence presented is in equipoise; that is, an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence is found to exist upon its consideration. 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. In the present case, the veteran has asserted that he was found to have high blood pressure while on active service in the Army. However, his statements are not substantiated by the medical evidence, including the April 1956 separation examination which noted no blood pressure abnormality or hypertension. The subsequently signed statement from the veteran in May 1956 also indicated that there had been no change in his physical condition. While the veteran indicated in connection with the treatment in September 1958, about 28 months after service, that he had been told by a physician previously that he had high blood pressure, this recorded history did not specifically relate this episode to service. In fact, the available service medical records clearly do not suggest that he had a blood pressure problem during active duty. Other submitted medical records referable to treatment from before service in 1949 also show higher blood pressure readings than that noted on the April 1956 discharge examination and suggest to the Board that the veteran had blood pressure problems before service. It is the Board's opinion, based on a review of all the evidence of record, that the veteran's current assertions that he was told that he had hypertension just prior to his discharge from service are not credible as they are not supported by this evidence. Rather, the Board finds that there has been presented no reasonable basis for concluding that hypertension was incurred in or aggravated by service or was manifested to a degree of 10 percent or more during the one-year presumptive period thereafter. In addition, no competent evidence has been submitted by the veteran to relate the onset of his currently demonstrated hypertension to service. Accordingly, as a preponderance of the evidence is against the claim, service connection is not warranted. ORDER Service connection for hypertension is denied. STEPHEN L. WILKINS 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.