Citation Nr: 20003879 Decision Date: 01/16/20 Archive Date: 01/15/20 DOCKET NO. 19-06 410 DATE: January 16, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability (other than posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD)) is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for PTSD is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from July 1974 to December 1977. 1. Service Connection – Acquired Psychiatric Disability 2. Service Connection – PTSD Upon review, the Board finds that remand is required to afford the Veteran a VA examination and to obtain VA opinions. Evidence of record included a March 2012 VA mental health intake consult from a clinical psychologist, which noted diagnoses of psychotic disorder not otherwise specified (NOS) and depressive disorder NOS. These diagnoses remained on the Veteran’s VA problem list as of November 2018 (the most recent such list currently of record). The Veteran has reported various in-service events potentially relevant to the claims on appeal. First, he reported that, essentially, he saw aircraft crash and saw parts of bodies of pilots while on the USS Saratoga (CV-60). See VA Form 21-4138 Dated by Veteran August 25, 2012 (“I saw parts of bodies, and recovered pilots while on board the USS Saratog[a]…I witnessed an aircraft crashed on flight deck in 1975 or 1976, and the pilot was killed. There was also a [helicopter] that hit the deck, and one hit the aft”); VA Form 21-0781 Dated by Veteran August 25, 2012 (reporting that in 1976 on the USS Saratoga an aircraft “tanked in the Med[iterranean] Sea pilots were killed only 25 [pounds] of flesh was returned by the recovery team”). Second, he reported, essentially, an incident where he was blown by jet blast while on the USS Saratoga in July 1976. See VA Form 21-0781 Dated by Veteran March 5, 2015 (“while assigned to launch [and] recovery aboard the USS Saratoga I was blown down by jet blast which carried me down the flight deck receiving numerous injuries to my knees. Planes were in flight operation [and] I almost lost my life by being ran over by a F-4 Phantom, horrifying occurrence which led to severe mental disorders leading to suicidal attempts”); see also July 1977 Service Treatment Record (STR) Veteran Statement (“During the 1975-76 cruise don’t remember what month time or date but during flight operations I was jet blast defector safety man who insures no one or thing is around or close to them while raising [and] lowering them was not paying attention further up they was turning around [and] F-4 Phantom squadron…which the pilot turn up full power [and] blew me straight into the jet blast defector module…I skidded of[f] the panel on my knees for about 50 yards”). Third, he reported that, essentially, he witnessed a ship collide with the USS Saratoga while he was on board. See VA Form 21-4138 Dated by Veteran August 25, 2012 (“the USS Missanau (spelling) collided with the USS Saratog[a] and put a large hole in the side of the ship. This was in about 1975-1976”). With respect to this event, the Veteran also reported in the statement dated August 25, 2012 that “I…am still having re[]curring visions of my experiencing the collision of the ship that ran into us during refueling of the USS Saratoga witnessing the bow tear thru our side and plunge towards me.” The Board notes that the Veteran is competent to report as to symptoms he experiences, such as recurring visions, and as to what he saw while on the USS Saratoga, such as a ship collision. Based on the evidence of record, the Board finds that a VA examination and opinion is warranted as to the issue of direct service connection. See 38 U.S.C. § 5103A(d); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(4); McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). Also, the Veteran is service-connected for bilateral knee disabilities and a January 2013 VA psychiatry note stated “[m]ood has been occasionally depressed due to medical issues; he says, ‘more frustrated than depressed [because] of pain and not able to move’ like he desires.” A subsequent May 2013 VA psychiatry note stated that the Veteran “has knee problems…Ambulation is somewhat limited.” Also, the most recent VA examination for the Veteran’s knees, conducted in November 2018, noted “daily 7-8/10 bilateral knee pain” and the occasional use of assistive devices as a normal mode of locomotion due to the Veteran’s knee condition. The Board finds that the evidence of record reasonably raises the issue of secondary service connection and an opinion addressing such will therefore be requested on remand. With respect to PTSD, the current evidence does not appear to reflect a diagnosis of this disability. The Board acknowledges the Veteran’s representative’s contentions regarding VA’s duty to assist with respect to attempting to verify the Veteran’s reported stressors. See April 2019 Statement. If the VA examination on remand, or other evidence of record, indicates a diagnosis of PTSD based on an in-service stressor, the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) should take appropriate action to attempt to verify the stressor(s) such diagnosis is based on. Finally, while on remand, outstanding VA treatment records must be obtained (the most recent records of records are from December 2018). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain all outstanding VA treatment records from December 2018 to the present. 2. Afford the Veteran a VA examination with respect to his acquired psychiatric disability claim. The examiner must provide an opinion addressing the following: (a.) Whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e., probability of 50 percent or greater) that any acquired psychiatric disability, to include psychotic disorder or depressive disorder, had its onset during active service or is caused or aggravated by any in-service disease, event, or injury. While review of the entire claims folder is required, attention is invited to the Veteran’s various reported potentially relevant in-service events, which were outlined in the body of the remand. Such included: i. That, essentially, he saw aircraft crash and saw parts of bodies of pilots while on the USS Saratoga. See VA Form 21-4138 Dated by Veteran August 25, 2012; VA Form 21-0781 Dated by Veteran August 25, 2012. ii. A “horrifying” incident where he was blown by jet blast while on the USS Saratoga in July 1976. See VA Form 21-0781 Dated by Veteran March 5, 2015; see also July 1977 STR Veteran Statement. iii. That, essentially, he witnessed a ship collide with the USS Saratoga while he was on board. See VA Form 21-4138 Dated by Veteran August 25, 2012. With respect to this event, the Veteran also reported in the statement dated August 25, 2012 that “I…am still having re[]curring visions of my experiencing the collision of the ship that ran into us during refueling of the USS Saratoga witnessing the bow tear thru our side and plunge towards me.” Additional attention is also invited to: i. A March 2012 VA psychiatry note, which noted that the Veteran “reports [auditory hallucinations] that he’s heard since his 20s.” The Board notes that the Veteran was 20 and 21 during his active service. ii. An undated Department of Corrections Psychological Screening Report, which noted regarding psychotropic medication “1975 Valium in US Navy.” (b.) Whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e., probability of 50 percent or greater) that any acquired psychiatric disability, to include psychotic disorder or depressive disorder, is due to or caused by the Veteran’s service-connected bilateral knee disabilities. (c.) Whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e., probability of 50 percent or greater) that any acquired psychiatric disability, to include psychotic disorder or depressive disorder, has been aggravated (i.e., increased in severity) by the Veteran’s service-connected bilateral knee disabilities. With respect to items “b” and “c,”, attention is invited to a January 2013 VA psychiatry note that stated “[m]ood has been occasionally depressed due to medical issues; he says, ‘more frustrated than depressed [because] of pain and not able to move’ like he desires,” a subsequent May 2013 VA psychiatry note that stated that the Veteran “has knee problems…Ambulation is somewhat limited” and the November 2018 VA knee examination report that noted “daily 7-8/10 bilateral knee pain” and the occasional use of assistive devices as a normal mode of locomotion due to the Veteran’s knee condition. For all opinions provided, the examiner must include the underlying reasons for any conclusions reached. C. TRUEBA Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Hoopengardner, 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.