Citation Nr: 21064175 Decision Date: 10/19/21 Archive Date: 10/19/21 DOCKET NO. 19-29 725 DATE: October 19, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is granted. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran has an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD, which is etiologically related to a corroborated in-service occurrence or event. CONCLUSION OF LAW Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, the criteria for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD, are met. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304 (f). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from March 1962 to March 1968. This case comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2018 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO or AOJ). The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) at a July 2021 video conference Board hearing. A transcript of the hearing is of record. Entitlement to Service Connection for an Acquired Psychiatric Disorder, to include PTSD Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from a disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. See 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (a). Generally, to establish a right to compensation for a present disability, 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." Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1362, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (quoting Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). See also Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2009); Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Service connection may be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all of the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that a disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (d). There are particular requirements for establishing PTSD in 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (f) that are separate from those for establishing service connection generally. Arzio v. Shinseki, 602 F.3d 1343, 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2010). In order to be entitled to service connection for PTSD, there must be medical evidence of PTSD, medical evidence that establishes a link between current symptoms and an in-service stressor, and credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressor occurred. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (f); Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Corroboration of the stressor is not required when a VA psychiatrist or psychologist diagnoses PTSD resulting from a fear of hostile military or terrorist activity when that fear is consistent with the circumstances of the Veteran's service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (f) (3). Corroboration of the existence of a stressor is also not required in certain circumstances when the Veteran was diagnosed with PTSD in service, the Veteran engaged in combat with the enemy and the claimed stressor is related to that experience, or the Veteran was a prisoner of war and the claimed stressor is related to that experience. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (f) (1), (2), (4). Except as otherwise provided by law, a claimant has the responsibility to present and support a claim for benefits. In evaluating a claim, the Board must determine the value of all evidence submitted, including lay and medical evidence. 38 U.S.C. § 1154 (a); Buchanan v. Nicholson, 451 F.3d 1331, 1335 (Fed. Cir. 2006). Although the Veteran initially filed a claim for entitlement to service connection for PTSD, anxiety, and depression, see December 2017 application for benefits, the Board has characterized the issue as entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability to include any and all psychiatric diagnoses shown in the claims file. Clemons v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 1 (2009). The Veteran contends that he has an in-service stressor relating to his service in the submarine force in the height of the Cold War while stationed aboard the USS James K. Polk, a nuclear submarine. See July 2021 hearing transcript. During the July 2021 Board hearing, the Veteran reported that while trained as a nuclear operator, he had various assignments on the submarine. He testified that he had his duties both in the upper level engine room, the lower level engine room, and an auxiliary space that was manned by Machinist Mates. Periodically, he would be assigned to operating the main turbines of the submarine in the engineering control room. The Veteran testified that his main stressor happened during active service when during a specified military event, orders were given to "man battle stations missile, man battle stations missile." The Veteran testified that these orders were different than on prior occasions when the orders would come out as a drill. This led the Veteran to believe on this occasion they were preparing to fire some or all of the missiles that were carried on the submarine which would have ultimately led to return fire and the deaths of innocent people. The Veteran's wife testified that when the Veteran came home she noticed "a drastic change in his whole personality" and that he wasn't the same person that she had met before. She testified the Veteran experienced nightmares and flailing. She testified that she didn't know what had happened on the Veteran's last patrol because he never spoke to her about anything and as a courtesy to him being in the service and his code of silence, she would not continue to ask questions. She recalled the Veteran exhibited extreme mood swings and that he dreamt of someone chasing him. See July 2021 hearing transcript. Evidence in the record supports a finding that the Veteran experienced a fear of hostile military activity. Specifically, the Veteran's military personnel records confirm that he had foreign service and that his training included, but was not limited to engineering laboratory technician training, nuclear power course. During a January 2018 VA examination, a VA psychologist found that the Veteran had a diagnosis of PTSD under the DSM-V. The examiner noted the Veteran could not share most of the most haunting events due to security classification. However, concerning his report of serving on a submarine that had been "reworked" and "prone to leakage", the examiner determined that the Veteran had an inservice stressor that supported a diagnosis of PTSD. The first element for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD, is medical evidence of a current disability. As noted above, during the January 2018 VA examination, a VA psychologist determined that the Veteran had diagnoses of PTSD. The first element has been established. The second element for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD, requires medical evidence that establishes a link between current symptoms and an in-service stressor. While the VA examiner opined the Veteran's PTSD was less likely than not related to military service, the examiner did note that such was based on a lack of evidence of the Veteran's stressor. The examiner did, however, note the Veteran's service records indicated the Veteran "served in a submarine on foreign soil," and that the Veteran's post-service treatment records indicated the Veteran "would not talk about it though it was during an intense time so it could be assumed." See January 2018 VA medical opinion. Based on the examiner's notations, the Board finds that such indicates the examiner found the Veteran to be credible in reporting that he was on a submarine in a hostile area/situation. Thus, there is a link between the Veteran's current symptoms and an in-service stressor. The third element necessary to establish service connection for PTSD is corroboration that the claimed in-service stressor occurred. As mentioned above, such corroboration is not required when a VA psychiatrist or psychologist diagnoses PTSD resulting from a fear of hostile military or terrorist activity when that fear is consistent with the circumstances of the Veteran's service, pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (f) (3). The January 2018 VA examiner is a VA psychologist presumed to know the criteria for diagnosing PTSD due to fear of hostile military activity. The clear import from her opinion is that the Veteran's reported stressors (being on an older submarine and being on alert for combat) were consistent with his clinical presentation and psychological testing. Therefore, the third and final element for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD has been met, and the Veteran's claim is granted. MICHAEL A. HERMAN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Smith, 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.