Citation Nr: 19152000 Decision Date: 07/03/19 Archive Date: 07/03/19 DOCKET NO. 18-00 220 DATE: July 3, 2019 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is denied. FINDING OF FACT The preponderance of the evidence is against a finding that the Veteran has a valid PTSD diagnosis due to an event, injury, or disease in service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for PTSD have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1110, 1112, 1113, 1116, 1137, 5107 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304 (2018). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The appellant is a Veteran who served on active duty from April 1972 to October 1979, August 1985 to August 1988, and August 1988 to April 1992. The period August 1988 to April 1992, has been deemed dishonorable for VA purposes. This matter is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2016 rating decision of the New Orleans, Louisiana, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In November 2018 a Board hearing was held before the undersigned. A transcript of the hearing is associated with the Veteran’s claims file. Entitlement to service connection for PTSD Service connection for PTSD generally requires: (1) medical evidence diagnosing the condition in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 4.125(a); (2) a link, established by medical evidence, between current symptoms an in-service stressor; and, (3) credible supporting evidence that the in- service stressor occurred. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f). The Veteran filed a claim for PTSD in March 2014. In a March 2015 statement, the Veteran described his stressor as learning that his ex-wife was having an affair with his first cousin’s husband. He reported losing his temper and assaulting her, breaking her jaw and putting her in the hospital for two weeks. He then cut the man’s neck with a blade knife. He remarried and assaulted his second wife by cutting her with a swiss blade knife, dragged her to his back yard, and cracked three of her ribs. He then stated that his live-in girlfriend received a busted lip while driving home. A formal finding of a lack of information required to corroborate the stressor was made in September 2015. The Veteran’s reported stressor was that upon returning from Germany he was told his ex-wife was having an affair, at which time he lost his temper and assaulted her and his cousin’s husband. The JSRRC does not verify incidents involving civilians because this information is difficult to verify, and the Veteran reported that no charges were filed. Later in an October 2015 statement, the Veteran contended that his PTSD is a result of witnessing the death of a fellow soldier. He maintains that he was driving a truck with M. C., hauling ammunition, lost control of the truck, which flipped and killed M. C. He detailed that the incident occurred in April 1975, at Fort Hood in Texas, and he was assigned to the 1st BN, 3rd Field Artillery. The second stressor was described as: after being released from jail, the Veteran was deemed a “snitch” and that people were out to get him. This resulted in him being afraid to leave his home for fear of being assaulted. Following a request to the Defense Personnel Records Information Retrieval System (DPRIS), in December 2015, a response was received that indicated after a search of U.S. Army historical records, there were no unit records pertaining to the 1st battalion, 3rd Field Artillery, Fort Hood, Texas, for the year 1975. Other historical documents were reviewed, to include the casualty data, but they were not able to verify the incident as described by the Veteran. They documented that there was a Specialist Fifth Class M. C., Jr, that was killed March 28, 1975, in a motor vehicle accident. SP5 C.’s vehicle hit the western guard rail of the Owl Creek Bridge, Fort Hood, Texas, at a high rate of speed, turned over and fell twenty feet on its top in the creek bed crushing him to death. It could not be confirmed that the Veteran was driving a truck with M. C. which fell twenty feet on its top crushing M. C. to death. At the Board hearing, the Veteran and his representative asserted that in 1975 while stationed at Fort Hood, his best friend died in a car accident. He reported being in the car, and not suffering any injuries. His temper flared up after the incident, and he broke his wife’s jaw. The Veteran filed for an initial claim for SSA disability in August 2010, due to diabetes, high blood pressure, PTSD, and a back injury. In January 2011 he had a psychiatric review, and was assessed as having an anxiety related disorder, meaning he had a medically determinable impairment that did not precisely satisfy diagnostic criteria. A diagnosis of PTSD was not confirmed by treatment records or the psychiatric examination. According to July 2012 VAMC records, the Veteran reported a history of PTSD. Again, at a June 2015 mental health visit, it is noted the Veteran had a history of treatment for PTSD, however this is not supported by objective testing. There is a lack of information to corroborate the stressors associated with the Veteran’s claim for service connection for PTSD. It could not be verified that the Veteran was present when the car flipped and crushed M. C. There is no record in the Veteran’s personnel records that he was in the motor vehicle accident with M. C., nor do service treatment records show treatment for injuries related to the accident. To the extent the Veteran contended he was fearful of being assaulted, a stressor of an event that almost happened is not possible to verify. Likewise, the stressors the Veteran detailed as being his assaults on his ex-wives and girlfriends, are descriptions of events wherein the Veteran assaulted others, as such he did not experience the stressor. Post-service medical records mention a history of a diagnosis of PTSD, however, this is without merit as there is no indication any testing was done to render a diagnosis of PTSD. Therefore, there is no probative evidence of an in-service event that caused his claimed PTSD. Upon careful review of the record, including the Veteran lay testimony, the Board finds that preponderance of the evidence is against awarding service connection for PTSD. The crucial inquiry here is whether the Veteran has established that he has PTSD due to his military service. The Board concludes he has not. Although the Board recognizes the Veteran’s sincere belief that he suffers from PTSD because of in-service trauma, there is no competent or credible evidence showing that the Veteran experienced an in-service trauma. The Veteran is competent to describe his symptoms, but he has not been shown to have medical expertise to render a competent medical opinion as to a diagnosis or etiology of what he observes. Again, his statements of witnessing M. C.’s death were not verified, and the statements of fearing an assault, and inflicting an assault on others, cannot be verified as stressors. Further, him being present at the time of M.C.’s death is unlikely considering there is no documentation in the personnel or service treatment records showing he was in the vehicle when the accident occurred. Surely, if the Veteran was in the vehicle that turned over and fell twenty feet on its top in a creek bed (causing M.C. to be crushed), he would have incurred injuries that would have been documented. To the extent that he claims he was in the car with M.C. at the time of the tragic crash, the Board finds the Veteran not credible. Although there is a documented history of PTSD in his VA treatment records, the diagnosis is not based upon a corroborated stressor or an exception to the requirement for a corroborated stressor. Additionally, with regard to the recent amendment codified at 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f)(3), the Veteran is not shown to have been exposed to any hostile military or terrorist activity. The Board reiterates that any previous diagnoses of PTSD were not based on the Veteran’s reported stressors of witnessing M. C.’s death, assaulting his ex-wives and girlfriends, and living in fear of being assaulted. In this regard, the Board finds that any diagnosis was solely based on the Veteran’s reported stressors, which have not been corroborated or are invalid stressors as the Veteran was the aggressor. As such, any such diagnoses of PTSD lack probative value. See Prejean v. West, 13 Vet. App. 444, 448-49 (2000) (stating that factors for assessing the probative value of a medical opinion are the physician’s access to the claims folder and the thoroughness and detail of the opinion). The Board may not accept the medical diagnoses to the extent that they are not supported by the medical evidence or are based upon an inaccurate factual background. Black v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 177 (1993); Reonal v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 458, 461 (1993) (the Board is not bound to accept a physician’s opinion when it is based exclusively on the recitations of a claimant that have been previously rejected). As noted above, the VAMC records do not indicate on what basis a diagnosis of PTSD was made, and therefore, lack any probative value. In sum, the most probative evidence of record does not show the Veteran has a valid diagnosis of PTSD related to an event, injury, or disease in service. The Board notes that under the provisions of 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b), the benefit of the doubt is to be resolved in the claimant’s favor in cases where there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding a material issue. The preponderance of the evidence, however, is against the Veteran’s claim, and thus that doctrine is not applicable. Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). H.M. WALKER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD E. Skiouris, Associate Counsel 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.