Citation Nr: 18140972 Decision Date: 10/09/18 Archive Date: 10/09/18 DOCKET NO. 16-07 027 DATE: October 9, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for PTSD is denied. Entitlement to service connection for an unspecified depressive disorder granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The preponderance of the evidence of record is against finding that the Veteran has, or has had at any time during the appeal, a current diagnosis of PTSD. 2. The Veteran’s unspecified depressive disorder began during active service. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for establishing entitlement to service connection for PTSD have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1112, 1131, 5107 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.307, 3.309 (2017). 2. The criteria for service connection for an unspecified depressive disorder are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1111, 1131, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(a). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from June 1974 to July 1975. The matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2013 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Des Moines, IA. Service Connection Service connection will be granted if the evidence demonstrates that a current disability resulted from an injury or disease incurred in or aggravated by active service, even if the disability was initially diagnosed after service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. 1. Entitlement to service connection for PTSD. The Veteran contends that his time in service led to an acquired psychiatric condition categorized as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The question for the Board is whether the Veteran has a current disability that began during service or is at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. The Board concludes that the Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of PTSD and has not had one at any time during the pendency of the claim or recent to the filing of the claim. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1363, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009); Romanowsky v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 289, 294 (2013); McClain v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 319, 321 (2007); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a), (d). The May 2017 VA examiner evaluated the Veteran and determined that, while he experienced subjective symptoms of depression and anxiety, he did not have a diagnosis of PTSD. Further, despite treatment from the time of service to the present, treatment records do not contain a diagnosis of PTSD. 2. Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric condition other than PTSD. The Veteran also contends that an acquired psychiatric condition other than PTSD is etiologically related to his active duty service. The Board concludes that the Veteran has a current diagnosis of an unspecified depressive disorder that began during active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1363, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). May 2017 VA treatment records show the Veteran has a current diagnosis of an unspecified depressive disorder, and the May 2017 VA examiner opined that the Veteran’s depressive disorder at least as likely as not began during active service. The rationale discussed the multiple lay statements regarding incidents during service that contributed to his depression. The Veteran also recounted incidents alleging discrimination against him by fellow service members. Evidence from the Veteran and his family members convey that the Veteran was a motivated, engaged, and positive person before entering service. These lay statements also suggest that the Veteran began to show signs of a psychiatric disorder during and shortly after service. The Board also recognizes that the Veteran’s records show his performance grades during February 1975, and again in June of 1975. These grades show a decrease in scores in four categories: Professional Performance, Military Behavior, Military Appearance, and Adaptability. The Veteran is competent to convey what happened to him during service and how it has affected his mental state since that time. Similarly, his family members are competent to provide facts and circumstances regarding any changes in the Veteran’s mental state during or after service. These alleged acts of discrimination against the Veteran are not documented in his service records. However, this is not determinative as to the credibility of the Veteran’s lay statement. It is very much plausible that these incidents or similar ones occurred during the Veteran’s service. Especially so when considered in conjunction with the Veteran’s other personnel records. With the evidence being in relative equipoise, the Board finds in favor of the Veteran regarding the existence of an in-service event. Similarly, the Board concludes that there is a nexus between the current disability and an in-service event. Using the above-stated analysis, and discussing relevant medical literature, the May 2017 VA examiner concluded that the Veteran’s depressive disorder is connected to events during service. In turn, the Veteran has fulfilled the requirements for service connection for his unspecified depressive disorder. MICHAEL LANE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD M. Hebert, Law Clerk