Citation Nr: 19137401 Decision Date: 05/14/19 Archive Date: 05/14/19 DOCKET NO. 18-38 748 DATE: May 14, 2019 ORDER Service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, claimed as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is denied. FINDING OF FACT There is insufficient evidence to corroborate an in-service stressor or to support a nexus between service and current depression. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304(f). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the Air Force from August 1953 to May 1957. 1. Service connection for PTSD The Veteran contends he suffers from PTSD due to traumatic events in service. 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. § 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). To establish entitlement to service-connected compensation benefits, a Veteran 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” – also known as the ‘nexus’ requirement. Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1362, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2010). In addition to the above criteria, claims of service connection for PTSD require medical diagnosis conforming to the requirements of section 4.125(a) and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), 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); see also 38 C.F.R. §4.125(a); Cohen v. Brown, 10 Vet. App. 128, 138 (1997). If the evidence shows that a veteran engaged in combat with the enemy and the claimed stressor is consistent with the circumstances of service, lay statements alone may be enough to prove the in-service stressor. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f)(2). Additionally, a stressor may be proven with lay statements alone if the veteran claims a stressor due to fear of hostile military or terrorist activity, the claimed stressor is consistent with the circumstances of service, and a VA or VA-contracted psychiatrist or psychologist confirms that the claimed stressor is adequate to support a PTSD diagnosis and that the veteran’s symptoms are related to the claimed stressor. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f)(3). The Board must consider all the evidence of record and make appropriate determinations of competence, credibility, and weight. See Washington v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 362, 368 (2005). When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any material issue, all reasonable doubt is resolved in favor of the claimant. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. The Veteran is competent to describe symptoms observable to his senses, but he is not competent to diagnose a mental health disability or determine its cause as this requires specialized medical training. See Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Based on the evidence, the Board finds the criteria for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder have not been met. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. First, the evidence shows a current mental health disability. VA treatment records from 2009 to 2015 show diagnosis of depressive disorder or depression. Additionally, treating providers in August 2009, August 2010, and December 2015 assessed the Veteran as having PTSD. Several mental health treatment notes discuss the death of the Veteran’s wife of 57 years as a significant stressor for his depression. Next, however, the evidence does not provide sufficient information to corroborate a stressor. The majority of the Veteran’s service treatment and personnel records were destroyed in a fire at the National Personnel Records Center, but the April 1957 discharge examination shows a normal psychiatric evaluation. His DD Form 214 lists his military occupational specialty as munitions specialist and shows one year and six months of foreign service. There is no documentation of combat service. In January 2015, the Veteran provided a statement describing stressful events. He wrote that when he was in Okinawa, he spent time in caves hunting relics and found bones and skulls. He reported watching as the other men took rocks and bashed-in about 12 men, women, and children’s heads. He explained he was then transferred out to ammo control with four men on an island; while on post, he fell asleep, a “grater hit a catch of bazuka shells,” and he awoke to find a woman’s head. He further wrote that at the barracks at Kedina Air Base, he heard loud gun shots at one in the morning and four guys were killed about 30 feet in front of him. The Veteran reported having trouble sleeping, losing weight, and drinking heavily. In his August 2016 notice of disagreement, he reported witnessing a man named “[F.]” cut his throat. The Regional Office (RO) determined there was insufficient information on the reported stressors to send to the U.S. Army or Joint Services Records Research Center (JSRRC) for corroboration. In July 2016, the RO sent the Veteran a letter notifying him that there was insufficient evidence to corroborate his reported stressors and requesting he provide additional information. He did not provide the needed information. Specifically, since the Veteran’s records have been destroyed, information such as the Veteran’s unit of assignment and dates of the reported stressors could help JSRRC investigate the events. Without such information, VA cannot corroborate that these stressor events took place, and the criteria for establishing service connection for PTSD cannot be met. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f). Regarding the current depression, the evidence fails to demonstrate a nexus to service. As noted, the separation examiner found normal psychiatric health. Moreover, current treating providers suggested the Veteran’s depression was due to the death of his wife. While the Veteran identified in-service symptoms such as loss of weight and heavy drinking, he has not reported ongoing depression symptoms or treatment since service. There is simply no evidence connecting his current depression to his service. TANYA SMITH Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD A.P. Armstrong The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential, and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.