Citation Nr: 18159286 Decision Date: 12/19/18 Archive Date: 12/18/18 DOCKET NO. 17-06 965 DATE: December 19, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from January 1966 to December 1967. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2015 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). Entitlement to service connection for PTSD is remanded. Under the relevant laws and regulations, service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. §1131 (2012). Generally, the evidence must show: (1) the existence of a present disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the present disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166 -67 (Fed. Cir. 2004); Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498, 505 (1995). Service connection for PTSD 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) (2017); Cohen v. Brown, 10 Vet. App. 128 (1997). The pertinent regulation provides that, if the evidence establishes that the veteran engaged in combat with the enemy and that 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. See 38 U.S.C. § 1154 (b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (f) (1). However, 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 medical opinion diagnosing PTSD does not suffice to verify the occurrence of the claimed in-service stressors. Cohen v. Brown, supra, at 142; Moreau v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 389, 395-396 (1996). In this regard, there is no evidence that the Veteran engaged in combat. He also does not contend that he has PTSD related to any fear of hostile military or terrorist activity during service. Therefore, the Veteran’s in-service stressors upon which his PTSD is based must be supported by credible evidence showing that the claimed in-service stressors occurred. The Veteran contends that his PTSD is related to incidents in service. First, the Veteran asserts that while he was assigned to the 532nd military police at Fort Dix, New Jersey, as a clerk in the stockade, he was processing a prisoner back into the stockade from the hospital after his second attempt at suicide. The Veteran states that the military policeman who brought the prisoner in told the prisoner that if he really wanted to kill himself he would cut his arm this way, “making a motion from the wrist up his arm.” The Veteran states that the next day when he went to work he was informed that the prisoner had killed himself exactly in that manor. “Shortly thereafter I began to have nightmares about that young man.” The Veteran explained that he was also the clerk who read the prisoners their dishonorable discharge and that in his nightmares the prisoner would be standing next to me yelling and crying, asking why he did not give him his discharge. “Those nightmares have continued for the past 49 years and still do to this day.” Second, the Veteran contends that his PTSD is related to an incident when he was walking to work and heard an alarm go off at the stockade. The Veteran asserts that he kept walking while the military police were running on the outside of the fence of the stockade, when he reached the end of the fence and saw the military policeman aim his rifle and shoot. The Veteran learned of the escape of two prisoners, and that one military policeman had shot another military policeman who was walking in the opposite direction around the stockade. Third, the Veteran explains that the next day the captain of the stockade came and said that he and another clerk would have to go with one military policeman over to the air base to pick up “cargo with special handling.” The Veteran says that he was to take the cargo from the hospital on base, and that the cargo was three body bags from Vietnam. The Veteran asserts that “nightmares of the sidewalks and streets coming alive with black silhouettes grabbing at [him]. I would be able to avoid them by jumping and gliding over them for hundreds of feet.” The Veteran’s electronic claims file indicates that the RO has attempted to verify the Veteran’s first and third stressors, as delineated above. However, the RO has not attempted to verify the Veteran’s second stressor regarding the escaped prisoners and military police shooting of one another. Therefore, upon remand, the Board directs the RO to take all steps necessary to verify such asserted incident. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Attempt to verify the Veteran’s claimed stressor of the escaped prisoners and military police shooting while assigned to the 532nd military police at Fort Dix as detailed above. See December 2015 VA 21-0781a and VA 21-0781 Statements in Support of Claim for PTSD. JSRRC should be requested to conduct a search of all available and appropriate sources, and provide any pertinent information that might corroborate any of the claimed stressors. Any information obtained should be associated with the claims file. If the search efforts produce negative results, documentation to that effect should be included in the claims file. 2. If and only if a claimed stressor is verified, and after all outstanding development has been completed and entered into the Veteran’s claims file, schedule the Veteran for a VA examination with a VA psychiatrist or psychologist to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran’s PTSD. Any indicated tests and studies should be performed. The examiner is requested to review the claims file and offer an opinion as the following questions: a) Verify the Veteran’s diagnosis of PTSD. b) For PTSD, if diagnosed, whether the Veteran’s reported stressors support the diagnosis of PTSD. If PTSD is not diagnosed, the examiner should explain why the diagnosis is not supported. c) Should any acquired psychiatric disorder other than PTSD be identified, proffer an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (a probability of 50 percent or greater) that the disability is related to or had its onset during service. The examiner is asked to explain the reasons behind any opinions expressed and conclusions reached. The examiner is reminded that the term “as likely as not” does not mean “within the realm of medical possibility,” but rather that the evidence of record is so evenly divided that, in the examiner’s expert opinion, it is as medically sound to find in favor of the proposition as it is to find against it. If the examiner is unable to offer any of the requested opinions, it is essential that the examiner offer a rationale for the conclusion that an opinion could not be provided without resort to speculation, together with a statement as to whether there is additional evidence that could enable an opinion to be provided, or whether the inability to provide the opinion is based on the limits of medical knowledge. See Jones v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 382 (2011). 3. Thereafter, undertake readjudicate the Veteran’s claim. If a complete grant of the benefit requested is not awarded, issue a Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC) to the Veteran and his representative, and provide them an opportunity to respond before returning the case to the Board. Michael Pappas Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD J. Tunis, Associate Counsel