Citation Nr: 1829911 Decision Date: 10/19/18 Archive Date: 10/30/18 DOCKET NO. 10-27 120 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Milwaukee, Wisconsin THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). (The issue of entitlement to an effective date prior to October 26, 2012, for the award of a 70 percent rating for social anxiety disorder with recurrent major depressive disorder is addressed in a separate Board decision.) REPRESENTATION Veteran represented by: Wisconsin Department of Veterans Affairs WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL The Veteran ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Alexander Panio, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from December 1981 to January 1987. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2015 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In May 2016, the Veteran testified at a Board hearing before one of the undersigned Veterans Law Judges (VLJs). In May 2017, the Board determined that the Veteran had requested another hearing on the matter and had been notified that he would receive such a hearing. Accordingly the issue was remanded for a new hearing, which occurred in August 2017 before another one of the undersigned VLJs. At the August 2017 hearing, the Veteran declined an opportunity for a separate hearing before the third VLJ participating in this decision. Transcripts of both Board hearings are of record. There are multiple appeals currently before the Board that arose at different times. As such, the appeals have different docket dates. For efficiency, the Board will adjudicate all appeals over which it has jurisdiction. See Ramsey v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 16, 34 (2006) (holding that 38 U.S.C. § 7107 is not an exclusive set of rules by which the Board must consider and decide cases, but rather was intended "to set broad guidelines for the general order of processing appeals at the Board to ensure fairness, efficiency, and timeliness in consideration and decision of appeals"). FINDING OF FACT At no time during the pendency of the claim does the Veteran have a diagnosis of PTSD and the record does not contain a recent diagnosis of such disability prior to his filing of a claim. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to service connection for PTSD are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran contends that he has PTSD related to an in-service incident where he was yelled at by a superior officer. Consequently, he maintains that service connection is warranted. In this regard, the Veteran has been in receipt of service connection for social anxiety disorder with recurrent major depressive disorder since August 2006 and has not alleged the presence of any acquired psychiatric disorder other than PTSD. As such, consideration of an acquired psychiatric disorder aside from PTSD is not warranted. Clemons v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 1, 5 (2009). Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by service. 38 U.S.C. § 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). Service connection may also be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, 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). Direct service connection may not be granted without evidence of a current disability; in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the present disease or injury. Id.; see also Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498, 506 (1995) aff'd, 78 F.3d 604 (Fed. Cir. 1996) [(table)]. For PTSD, service connection requires medical evidence diagnosing the condition in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 4.125(a), a link, established by medical evidence between current symptoms and an in-service stressor, and credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressor occurred. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f). In McClain v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 319, 321 (2007), the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) held that the requirement of the existence of a current disability is satisfied when a claimant has a disability at the time he files his claim for service connection or during the pendency of that claim, even if the disability resolves prior to adjudication of the claim. However, in Romanowsky v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 289 (2013), the Court held that when the record contains a recent diagnosis of disability prior to a claimant filing a claim for benefits based on that disability, the report of diagnosis is relevant evidence that the Board must address in determining whether a current disability existed at the time the claim was filed or during its pendency. When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, the Secretary shall give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; see also Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 53 (1990). Based on a review of the evidence of record, the Board finds that the requirements for service connection for PTSD have not been met. Specifically, the Board finds that the Veteran has not been diagnosed with PTSD in accordance with applicable regulations, which require a diagnosis in conformance with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), American Psychiatric Association, at any time pertinent to the appeal period. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.125(a). In this regard, the Veteran contends that he has PTSD symptomatology and has been diagnosed and treated for such at the Milwaukee Vet Center. However, records from the Vet Center dated from 2014 to April 2017 fail to reveal such a diagnosis. Specifically, although the Veteran has participated in therapy with a readjustment counselor, the records do not contain a diagnosis of PTSD pursuant to the DSM-5. Moreover, while the Veteran, as a lay person, is competent to report observable symptomatology, he lacks the medical training and expertise necessary to diagnose PTSD. See Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465 (1994), Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F. 3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Therefore, while the Veteran claims to have PTSD, he is not medically qualified to make such an assessment. The Board acknowledges that, while record shows a single diagnosis of PTSD in October 1991, such was rendered well before the Veteran filed the current claim in September 2016, and does not appear to have been reproduced or confirmed by any other treatment provider. In this regard, the Veteran underwent a VA examination in November 2016 to definitively assess whether he has PTSD. The examiner, after a review of the file and in-person interview, found that, while the Veteran does have some PTSD symptoms, he did not meet the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for PTSD. Therefore, while the Veteran has been noted to have some PTSD symptomatology, the effect of which is contemplated in his currently assigned 70 percent rating for his service-connected social anxiety disorder with recurrent major depressive disorder, he has not been diagnosed with PTSD in accordance with the applicable regulation at any time during the pendency of the claim and the record does not contain a recent diagnosis of such disability prior to his filing of a claim. Consequently, the Board finds that service connection for PTSD is not warranted. In reaching such determination, the Board has considered the applicability of the benefit of the doubt doctrine. However, the preponderance of the evidence is against the Veteran's claim for entitlement to service connection for PTSD. As such, that doctrine is not applicable in the instant appeal, and his claim must be denied. 8 U.S.C. 5107; 38 C.F.R. 3.102; Gilbert, supra. ORDER Service connection for PTSD is denied. ______________________________ T. REYNOLDS Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals __________________________ RYAN T. KESSEL Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals ____________________________________________ A. JAEGER Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Department of Veterans Affairs