Citation Nr: 18141559 Decision Date: 10/10/18 Archive Date: 10/10/18 DOCKET NO. 16-24 362 DATE: October 10, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is granted. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran has a current diagnosis of PTSD related to a verified in-service stressor. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for PTSD are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(a), 3.304(f). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION 1. Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include depressive disorder and PTSD Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from a disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (a). Establishing service connection generally requires medical or, in certain circumstances, lay evidence of (1) a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a link between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the present disability. Romanowsky v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 289, 293 (2013). Service connection may be granted for any disease initially diagnosed after service when all of the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (d). A veteran is entitled to service connection for PTSD when the record before the Secretary contains (1) a current medical diagnosis of PTSD, (2) credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressor actually occurred, and (3) medical evidence establishing a linkage between the claimed in-service stressor and the current symptoms of PTSD. See Cohen v. Brown, 10 Vet. App. 128, 138 (1997); 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (f). If the evidence establishes that the 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 alone may establish the occurrence of the claimed in-service stressor. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (f). If a PTSD claim is based on the Veteran's fear of hostile military or terrorist activity, then the veteran's lay testimony is sufficient to corroborate the existence of the stressor if (1) a psychiatrist or psychologist "confirms that the claimed stressor is adequate to support a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder and that the veteran's symptoms are related to the claimed stressor"; (2) the psychiatrist or psychologist's findings are not contradicted by "clear and convincing evidence"; and (3) "the claimed stressor is consistent with the places, types, and circumstances of the veteran's service." 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (f) (3). In order to grant service connection for PTSD to a non-combat veteran, there must be credible evidence to support the veteran's assertion that the stressful event occurred. A stressor need not be corroborated in every detail. Suozzi v. Brown, 10 Vet. App. 307, 311 (1997). Moreover, a medical opinion diagnosing PTSD does not suffice to verify the occurrence of the claimed in-service stressors. Cohen v. Brown, 10 Vet. App. 128, 142 (1997); Moreau v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 389, 395-396 (1996). In this case, the Veteran’s service records, including his DD Form 214 reflect that, served in the United States Navy on active duty from February 1983 to January 1987, his military occupational specialty (MOS) was that of a Hull Technician, he served on the USS New Jersey during his active service and he received a Navy Expeditionary Medal in September 1983 with respect to service in Lebanon. In his May 2013 statement regarding his in-service stressor, the Veteran reported that his ship was fired upon while serving on the USS New Jersey stationed in Lebanon. The Veteran also submitted online treatise information in April 2015 regarding the history of the USS New Jersey, including having been stationed in the waters off the coast of Beirut, Lebanon in 1983, including during an October 1983 barracks bombing and a December 1983 firing of projectiles from the ship onto hostile positions inland. The Veteran's statements regarding the events of his service, which have not been contradicted by other evidence of record, are deemed credible and to have occurred as reported. 38 U.S.C. § 1154(b). The Board observes that the RO has also conceded the in-service stressor was verified by his service records. While the VA examiners in the March 2014 VA examination, April 2014 VA addendum and August 2016 VA examination and opinion found that the Veteran did not meet the full criteria for PTSD and his currently diagnosed depressive disorder/major depressive disorder was not incurred in or otherwise related to the Veteran’s in-service incident, he had reported a history of depression and military stressors as early as 1992 and was recently diagnosed with PTSD by both VA and private treatment providers which was based on the claimed in-service stressors. In a February 1992 Vet Center evaluation, approximately five years after the Veteran’s separation from active service, he complained of anger and depression for a period of three to five years in duration, and was diagnosed in part with depressive disorder, not otherwise specified. In a March 1992 Vet Center report, he reported having been depressed at the deaths of Marines in Lebanon in October 1983 and reported that during “combat duty” he experienced fear, a background affect of depression and a sense of futility about the combat. In a December 2012 VA outpatient treatment report, the Veteran was diagnosed with PTSD and depression and reported his military trauma of witnessing an attack on U.S. Marines on “October 23” and that his buddies were being sniped at while he was stationed on the USS New Jersey. In a January 2017 private psychological report, the Veteran again reported his military stressor included being stationed on the USS New Jersey off of the coast of Lebanon in 1983 to provide support to the U.S. Marine Barracks which were attacked in Beirut and U.S. personnel were killed. The Veteran was diagnosed with PTSD in that report. Taken together, the Veteran’s verified in-service stressors and the current medical diagnoses of PTSD, at the very least, place the evidence in a state of relative equipoise as to whether the Veteran meets the criteria for a diagnosis of PTSD. Therefore, resolving all doubt in favor of the Veteran, the probative evidence of record demonstrates he has a current diagnosis of PTSD related to a verified in-service stressor. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 53-56 (1990). S. L. Kennedy Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Saira Spicknall, Counsel