Citation Nr: 18154683 Decision Date: 11/30/18 Archive Date: 11/30/18 DOCKET NO. 14-28 721A DATE: November 30, 2018 ORDER The claim of entitlement to service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of PTSD under the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders 4th Edition (DSM-IV). 2. The Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of PTSD under the DSM 5th Edition (DSM-5). 3. The Veteran is service connected for an acquired psychiatric disorder per an August 2018 Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for establishing entitlement to service connection for PTSD have not been met. 38 C.F.R. § 1110 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304, 4.125 (2018). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active duty service with the United States Navy from February 1976 to May 1979. This matter is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from an October 2011 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in St. Petersburg, Florida. During the pendency of the appeal, the Board in an August 2018 decision, granted the Veteran entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder. The Veteran had previously testified in an April 2018 hearing before the undersigned, where the Veteran argued that he was entitled to service connection for PTSD. A hearing transcript was added to the record. Although the Veteran was granted service-connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder the Veteran has not withdrawn his claim for entitlement to service connection for PTSD. Accordingly, the claim for entitlement to service connection for PTSD remains on appeal and before the Board. VA’s Duty to Assist The VA must provide an examination when there is: (1) competent evidence of a current disability or persistent or recurrent symptoms of a disability; (2) evidence establishing that an event, injury, or disease occurred in service or establishing certain diseases manifesting during an applicable presumptive period for which the claimant qualifies; (3) an indication that the disability or persistent or recurrent symptoms of a disability may be associated with the Veteran’s service or with another service-connected disability, but (4) insufficient competent medical evidence on file for the VA to make a decision on the claim. See McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (c)(4)(i) (2018). The record indicates that the Veteran has not been diagnosed with PTSD and that there is no current diagnosis of PTSD. The Veteran submitted a July 2018 private psychological evaluation, from Dr. A., which indicated that the Veteran had been diagnosed with adjustment disorder with disturbance of mood and conduct, other specific trauma disorder, polysubstance dependence in partial remission and cannabis use disorder. The July 2018 examination indicated that the Veteran “does not endorse symptoms that would meet a full diagnosis for PTSD.” The evidence of record does establish that an event, injury, or disease did occur in service and that the disability is associated with the Veteran’s service. Dr. A. did find that the Veteran met criteria for other specific trauma disorders that were “as likely as not” due to the events from the Veteran’s military service, but not PTSD. That the VA’s Duty to provide a VA medical examination is not triggered here. The VA has the ability determine the Veteran’s claim for PTSD from the competent medical evidence of record. McLendon, 20 Vet. App. 79, at 81, requires there to be insufficient evidence to determine the claim. In this instance we have sufficient information, provided by the Veteran, that he does not have a diagnosis of PTSD. Thus, a VA examination is not warranted. Expansion of the claim of the Veteran In Clemons v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 1 (2009), the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) held that the scope of a mental health disability claim includes any mental disorder that may reasonably be encompassed by the claimant’s description of the claim, reported symptoms, and other information of record. See also 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (a) (3) (2018). The Board has already addressed the reasonable expansion of the Veteran’s claim for PTSD and treated it as a claim for all psychiatric disorders. In so doing, the Board has granted the Veteran’s claim for service-connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder in their August 2018 decision. The Board may focus the determination of the Veteran’s claim for PTSD without requiring the Board to consider other reasonably encompassed psychiatric disorders, as have already been adjudicated. The Board’s obligation to consider any mental disorder that may reasonably be encompassed by the Veteran’s description, reported symptoms, and the record have already been met. Entitlement to service connection for (PTSD) Generally, to establish service connection there must be competent evidence showing: (1) a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the present disability and the in-service injury incurred or aggravated during service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (2018). Pursuant to the requirements of 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (f) (2018), service connection of a PTSD claim requires: (1) a diagnosis that conforms to the requirements of 38 C.F.R. § 4.125 (a) (2018); (2) a medical link between the diagnosis and an in-service stressor; and (3) credible supporting evidence of the occurrence of the in-service stressor. The requirements of 38 C.F.R. § 4.125 (a) (2018) indicate that the diagnosis of a mental disorder must conform to the DSM-5. Effective March 19, 2015, the VA replaced outdated psychiatric references with references to the DSM-5. The Secretary specifically noted that it did not intend for the provisions to apply to claims that were pending before the Board (claims already certified to the Board on appeal) on or before August 4, 2014. See 80 Fed. Reg. 14308 (March 19, 2015). As the current case was certified to the Board on April 7, 2015, which is after August 4, 2014, the Veteran should have been afforded a VA examination in compliance with the DSM-5 criteria. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.125 (a) (2018). As noted, the obligation of a VA examination in compliance with the DSM-5 does not apply as the Veteran received a private psychological examination in July 2018 which sufficiently meets the DSM-5 requirements, and those of 38 C.F.R. § 4.125 (a) (2018). The VA benefits system does not favor the opinion of a VA examiner over a private examiner, or vice versa if the report is sufficiently complete to be adequate to adjudicate the claim of the Veteran. See 38 U.S.C.§ 5125 (2012). As discussed, review of this private psychological examination from July 2018, the Board finds that the exam is sufficient to be adequate to adjudicate the claim of the Veteran and the need to receive an additional adequate VA examination is unnecessary. The July 2018 private examination is found to be competent, thorough, and extensive. The exam speaks to reviewing the one thousand four hundred and seventy (1,470) pages of medical records of the Veteran, having an extensive one hour in-person interview, and the finding that the Veteran exhibits certain symptoms of PTSD but not meeting the full criteria. The examiner indicates the criteria that the Veteran meets and does not meet for a PTSD diagnosis. The private examination goes on to diagnose the Veteran with other psychiatric disorders. All psychological claims are evaluated under the same General Rating Formula for Mental Disorders at 38 C.F.R. § 4.130. Therefore, the Veteran is not prejudiced in finding that he does not meet the requirements for PTSD but does meet the requirements of an acquired psychiatric disorder, as indicated in the August 2018 Board decision. The July 2018 private examination meets the requirements to be sufficient to adjudicate the Veteran’s claim for PTSD. (CONTINUED NEXT PAGE) In finding that the July 2018 private examination is competent and sufficient the requirements of 38 C.F.R. § 4.125 (a) (2018) have been met with an examination sufficient under the DSM-5. However, the Veteran has not met the requirements of 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (f) (2018). There is no current diagnosis for PTSD, and there is no medical link between the diagnosis of PTSD and an in-service stressor. See Brammer v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 223 (1992). The Board finds that the Veteran is not entitled to service-connection for PTSD. B. MULLINS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD C.A. Teich, Associate Counsel