Citation Nr: 18151747 Decision Date: 11/20/18 Archive Date: 11/20/18 DOCKET NO. 16-48 952 DATE: November 20, 2018 ORDER Service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is denied. Service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder to include an unspecified depressive disorder is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran is currently diagnosed with an acquired psychiatric disorder of unspecified depressive disorder. 2. The currently diagnosed acquired psychiatric disorder did not have its onset during service and is not otherwise related to active duty service. 3. The Veteran is not currently diagnosed with PTSD. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for service connection for PTSD have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5103, 5103A, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.159, 3.303, 3.304, 3.326, 4.125. 2. The criteria for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include unspecified depressive disorder, have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5103, 5103A, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.159, 3.303, 3.304, 3.326, 4.125. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from January 2003 to October 2007. This matter is on appeal from a March 2015 rating decision issued by the Regional Office (RO) in New Orleans, Louisiana. The Board has recharacterized the issues on appeal as service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder and service connection for PTSD, in accordance with the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans’ Claims decision in Clemons v. Shinseki. 23 Vet. App. 1 (2009) (holding that a claim for benefits of one psychiatric disorder also encompassed benefits based on other psychiatric diagnoses and should be considered by the Board to be within the scope of the filed claim). Duties to Notify and Assist The Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000 (VCAA) and implementing regulations impose obligations on VA to provide claimants with notice and assistance. See 38 U.S.C. §§ 5102, 5103, 5103A, 5107, 5126; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.156, 3.159, 3.326. Neither the Veteran nor the representative has raised any issues regarding the duty to notify or duty to assist. See Scott v McDonald, 789 F.3d 1375, 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (holding that “the Board’s obligation to read filings in a liberal manner does not require the Board . . . to search the record and address procedural arguments when a veteran fails to raise them before the Board”); Dickens v. McDonald, 814 F.3d 1359, 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (applying Scott to duty to assist argument). Based on the foregoing, the Board finds that all relevant documentation, including VA treatment records, VA examinations, and private treatment records, has been secured and all relevant facts have been developed. There remains no question as to the substantial completeness of the issues on appeal. 38 U.S.C. §§ 5103, 5103A, 5107; 38 C.F.R §§ 3.159, 3.326. The duties to notify and assist have been met. Service Connection Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). Service connection may be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). Service connection generally requires (1) medical evidence of a current disability; (2) medical or, in certain circumstances, lay evidence of in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) medical evidence of a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the current disability. Claims for service connection for PTSD require medical diagnosis conforming to the requirements of 38 C.F.R. § 4.125(a), an in-service stressor accompanied by credible and supporting evidence that the stressor claimed to be the cause of the disorder occurred in service, and established medical evidence connecting the current disability to the stressor. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (f); 38 C.F.R. § 4.125(a); Cohen v. Brown, 10 Vet. App. 128, 138 (1997). Lay testimony is sufficient to corroborate a claimed stressor when, absent clear and convincing evidence to the contrary, the evidence establishes that the Veteran engaged in combat with the enemy and the claimed stressor is related to that combat. 38 U.S.C. 1154 (b). The Veteran contends that the acquired psychiatric disorder, which he contends is PTSD, is connected to service, more specifically to deployment to Afghanistan during service. The Veteran reports that he began experiencing symptoms soon after separation from service – that after service separation he had trouble maintaining his marriage, which ended in divorce in 2009, has a fear of being in large crowds, is hypervigilant, acts erratically at work, and is unable to establish and maintain new relationships. The Veteran claims that he did not experience any of these symptoms prior to entering service. See September 2016 Substantive Appeal. 1. Service Connection for the Acquired Psychiatric Disorder The Board finds that the Veteran is currently diagnosed with an acquired psychiatric disorder of unspecified depressive disorder. See January 2015 VA Examination. The Veteran experienced an in-service event when he feared hostile military or terrorist activity in Afghanistan. See September 2016 Statement of the Case. After a review of all the evidence, the Board finds that the weight of the evidence is against finding a nexus between the current depressive disorder and active duty service. As evidenced by the September 2002 service entrance examination, the Veteran had no pre-existing psychiatric abnormalities noted on entrance. Service treatment records do not indicate any complaint of or treatment for any psychiatric disorder. Moreover, in the March 2007 Post Deployment Health Assessment, the Veteran reported that he did not experience any psychiatric symptoms since returning from Afghanistan. Post-service treatment records do not indicate that the depressive disorder is related to service. The Veteran submitted several private treatment records that outlined the discussions he had with a psychologist. The Veteran discussed his marriage, divorce, child custody arrangements, new relationships, and finances. See Private Treatment Records from October 2008, November 2008, December 2008, January 2009, February 2009, March 2009, and April 2009. These records do not contain any mention of experience during active duty service, nor do they contain any evidence of a nexus between psychiatric symptoms and the acquired psychiatric disorder. In fact, these private treatment records describe several stressful life events that occurred after service that have negatively affected the Veteran’s psychiatric well-being. In August 2012 VA treatment records, the Veteran reported that he began drinking alcohol excessively as a way to cope with his separation from his spouse in 2007. The Veteran claimed that he decreased his alcohol consumption after his father died in 2012, but has problems with weight control, anger, sleep maintenance, concentration, hypervigilance, and being in crowds. The Board finds no probative evidence in the post-service treatment records with regard to establishing a nexus for the current acquired psychiatric disorder (depressive disorder). The Veteran submitted to a VA examination in January 2015. When questioned about his medical history, the Veteran denied a history of pre-military or in-service mental health care and denied a history of referrals for psychiatric evaluations. The Veteran reported taking anti-depressant medication in 1992 because he had trouble managing his anger and problems in in his romantic relationship at the time. The VA examiner diagnosed the Veteran with unspecified depressive disorder and alcohol use disorder. The VA examiner opined that the diagnosed unspecified depressive disorder is less likely as not caused by, or a result of service in Afghanistan, and that the (post-service) alcohol use disorder is most likely due to, or exacerbated by the unspecified depressive disorder. Upon rendering this opinion, the examiner noted several post-service work and life stressors relevant to the opinion, including the Veteran’s divorce, conflicts at work, strained family relationships, and involvement in two physical altercations while intoxicated. In consideration of the foregoing, the Board finds that a preponderance of the lay and medical evidence of record weighs against the service connection claim for the acquired psychiatric disorder, including diagnosed depressive disorder. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.159, 3.303, 3.304, 4.125. 2. Service Connection for PTSD The Board finds that the Veteran is not currently diagnosed with PTSD. Even though the Veteran claims that he exhibited symptoms of PTSD after discharge from service and continues to exhibit those same symptoms, he is not competent to diagnose himself with PTSD. Young v. McDonald, 766 F.3d 1348, 1353 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (holding that “PTSD is not the type of medical condition that lay evidence . . . is competent and sufficient to identify”). Moreover, the positive PTSD screening from the May 2012 VA treatment records do not constitute a diagnosis of PTSD for VA purposes under 38 C.F.R. § 4.125. Lastly, in the January 2015 VA examination, the VA examiner determined that the Veteran did not meet the diagnostic criteria for PTSD. In consideration of the foregoing, the Board finds that a preponderance of the lay and medical evidence of record weighs against the service connection claim for PTSD. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.159, 3.303, 3.304, 4.125. J. PARKER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Danielle Costantino, Associate Counsel