Citation Nr: 0803298 Decision Date: 01/29/08 Archive Date: 02/08/08 DOCKET NO. 04-09 564 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in New Orleans, Louisiana THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: The American Legion WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Brian J. Milmoe, Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from July 1968 to July 1971, with service in Okinawa from January 1969 to August 1970. This matter was most recently before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) in August 2005, at which time it was remanded to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in New Orleans, Louisiana, through the VA's Appeals Management Center (AMC) in Washington, DC. The purposes of such remand were to obtain relevant treatment records and to facilitate readjudication of the veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD on the basis of evidence submitted at a Board hearing in May 2005 without a waiver for its initial consideration by the RO. Following the AMC's attempts to complete the requested actions, the case has since been returned to the Board for further review. Received by the Board in October 2007 in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 20.1304 (2007) was additional documentary evidence, which was not accompanied by a waiver for its initial review by the RO. However, inasmuch as the veteran is herein found to be entitled to service connection for PTSD, the need to solicit a waiver from the veteran or to remand the matter for RO consideration is obviated. FINDING OF FACT There is a current medical diagnosis of PTSD in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 4.125(a); there is credible supporting evidence that a claimed in-service stressor actually occurred; and there is medical evidence of a nexus between the veteran's d PTSD and his confirmed in-service stressor. CONCLUSION OF LAW PTSD was incurred during active military service. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1110 (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304(f) (2007). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000 describes the VA's duties to notify and assist claimants in substantiating a claim for VA benefits. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5100, 5102, 5103, 5103A, 5107, 5126 (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.156(a), 3.159, 3.326(a) (2007). In light of the Board's full grant of the benefit sought by this appeal, there is no to discuss whether the veteran was fully and timely notified or provided all of the assistance to which we was entitled. Likewise, the need to ascertain whether the AMC complied in full with reach directive of the Board's remand in August 2005 is also obviated. VA regulation, 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f), sets forth the criteria necessary to establish service connection for PTSD. For service connection to be awarded for PTSD, the record must show: (1) A current medical diagnosis of PTSD in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 4.125(a) (2007); (2) combat status or credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressor actually occurred; and (3) medical evidence of a causal nexus between diagnosed PTSD and the claimed in- service stressor. With regard to the second criterion, the evidence necessary to establish that the claimed stressor actually occurred varies depending on whether it can be determined that the veteran "engaged in combat with the enemy." 38 U.S.C.A. § 1154(b) (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(d) (2007). If it is determined through military citation or other supportive evidence that a veteran engaged in combat with the enemy and the claimed stressor is related to that combat, in the absence of clear and convincing evidence to the contrary, and provided that the claimed stressor is consistent with the circumstances, conditions, or hardships of the veteran's service, the veteran's lay testimony regarding the reported stressors must be accepted as conclusive evidence as to their actual occurrence and no further development or corroborative evidence will be necessary. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f). Where a determination is made that the veteran did not "engage in combat with the enemy," or the claimed stressor is not related to combat, the veteran's lay testimony alone will not be enough to establish the occurrence of the alleged stressor. Moreau v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 389, 395-96 (1996); Dizoglio v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 163, 166 (1996). In such cases, the record must contain service records or other corroborative evidence that substantiates or verifies the veteran's testimony or statements as to the occurrence of the claimed stressor. West (Carlton) v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 70, 76 (1994); Zarycki v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 91, 98 (1993). A medical opinion diagnosing PTSD does not suffice to verify the occurrence of the claimed in-service stressor(s). Moreau, 9 Vet. App. at 395-96. The veteran contends that he suffers from PTSD as a result of in-service stressors, including his loading and unloading of mutilated bodies and body parts of deceased Vietnam soldiers while performing body bag details as a part of his duties while stationed in Okinawa, Japan during the Vietnam Conflict. Service records confirm that the veteran served in Okinawa from January 1969 to August 1970, during which time his principal duties were as a supply clerk and parachute packer. In addition, a fellow serviceman who also served on Okinawa from May 1970 to June 1971 and with whom the veteran had nearly daily contact indicated in his statement, received by VA in May 2007, that the veteran was involved in the loading and unloading of body bags and parachutes and that he found such tasks to be stressful. In all, the Board finds that the veteran's claimed stressor event involving his loading and unloading of body bags, as well as his inspection thereof, some of which were not fully sealed and contained bodies or parts of bodies of slain soldiers, has been sufficiently corroborated by independent, credible supporting evidence. Moreover, the Board finds the veteran's account of such stressor to be credible and not otherwise contradicted by the evidentiary record. As well, the medical evidence of record identifies diagnoses of PTSD offered by three or more medical professionals, including a VA psychiatrist, and treatment therefor. No VA psychiatric examination has been conducted to evaluate the nature and etiology of the veteran's PTSD, and, in this instance, none is needed given that the medical evidence on file satisfies the requirements of 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f) that there be a current medical diagnosis of PTSD in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 4.125(a) and that there be competent medical evidence linking the veteran's PTSD to a verified stressor. Indeed, VA and Vet Center records, as compiled by examining and treating mental health professionals, describe the veteran's intrusive thoughts and dreams about improperly closed body bags, dead bodies, and body parts, such as he encountered while on active duty in Okinawa. For the foregoing reasons, the veteran meets all three criteria of 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f). Thus, a grant of service connection for PTSD is warranted. ORDER Entitlement to service connection for PTSD is granted. _________________________________________________ R. F. WILLIAMS Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals