Citation Nr: 19159489 Decision Date: 08/01/19 Archive Date: 07/31/19 DOCKET NO. 16-48 985 DATE: August 1, 2019 ORDER New and material evidence has not been presented, and reopening the claim of entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability is denied. FINDING OF FACT 1. In an unappealed April 2013 rating decision, the Veteran was denied entitlement to service connection for major depressive disorder (claimed as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD)). 2. The evidence associated with the record subsequent to the April 2013 rating decision is cumulative or redundant of the evidence previously of record, or does not relate to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claims. CONCLUSION OF LAW New and material evidence has not been received sufficient to reopen a claim of entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability. 38 U.S.C. § 5108 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.156 (2018). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active military service from April 1976 to April 1979 and September 1990 and August 1991. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2015 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Montgomery, Alabama. Claim to Reopen - Acquired Psychiatric Disability In an October 1979 administrative decision, the Veteran was denied entitlement to service connection for anxiety state with depression based on the Veteran’s failure to report for a scheduled VA examination. The Veteran did not appeal that decision. In a December 2002 rating decision, the Veteran was denied entitlement to service connection for depression was denied based on a finding that the disability was not incurred in or caused by service. The Veteran did not appeal that decision. In a January 2010 rating decision, reopening the previously denied claim of entitlement to service connection for anxiety state with depression (now claimed as nervousness) was denied based on a finding that new and material evidence had not been submitted. The Veteran did not appeal that decision. In an April 2013 rating decision, the Veteran was denied entitlement to service connection for major depressive disorder (claimed as PTSD) based on a finding that there was no confirmed diagnosis of PTSD. The Veteran did not appeal that decision. The evidence that has been added to the record since the April 2013 rating decision includes the following: an August 2012 VA mental disorders examination report showing a current diagnosis of unspecified depressive disorder and alcohol use disorder in early remission, and a medical opinion against the claim; lay statements from the Veteran indicating that he has a psychiatric disability that is related to active service; and VA Medical Center treatment records showing current treatment for a psychiatric disability. The Board finds that the additional evidence added to the record is not new and material. In this regard, the Veteran has not submitted evidence that tends to indicate that he has a psychiatric disability that is related to his active service. The lay statements of record indicating that he has a current psychiatric disability as a result of his service in Southwest Asia are cumulative and redundant of those previously considered by VA in the April 2013 rating decision. Further, the Veteran has not provided any competent medical evidence indicating that his current diagnosed depression is related to his active service. As such, the Board finds that reopening the claim of entitlement to service connection for a psychiatric disability is not warranted. As the Veteran has not fulfilled his threshold burden of submitting new and material evidence to reopen the finally disallowed claim, the benefit-of-the-doubt doctrine is not applicable. See Annoni v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 463, 467 (1993). Kristin Haddock Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Ikechukwu Umez-Eronini, 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.