Citation Nr: 21067517 Decision Date: 11/04/21 Archive Date: 11/04/21 DOCKET NO. 19-05 940A DATE: November 4, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, diagnosed as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), is granted. FINDING OF FACT Resolving all doubt in the Veteran's favor, he has been diagnosed with PTSD as a result of an in-service stressor consistent with the circumstances of his peacetime service. CONCLUSION OF LAW PTSD was incurred during peacetime service. 38 U.S.C. § 1131; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304(f). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from January 1959 to January 1961. The Veteran appeared at a Board hearing September 2019; a transcript is of record. With respect to the Board hearing, the undersigned VLJ clarified the issue on appeal, identified potential evidentiary deficits, and clarified the type of evidence that would support the Veteran's claim. These actions complied with any duties owed during a hearing. 38 C.F.R. §3.103. The motion was granted to hold the record open for 90 days was granted to allow for the Veteran to submit additional evidence in support of his claim. In a February 2020 decision, the Board denied the claim, finding that there was no current acquired psychiatric disorder. The Veteran appealed the Board's denial to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In January 2021, the Court issued an order granting a December 2020 Joint Motion for Remand (JMR), remanding the claim to the Board for further action, specifically to obtain potentially outstanding West Palm Beach VA Medical Center (VAMC) treatment records dated in October 2019 which were referred to in a November 2019 VA treatment record already associated with the claim. The matter has been returned to the Board. The Veteran's attorney representative submitted evidence and argument directly to the Board in October 2021 with waiver of any applicable agency or original jurisdiction (AOJ) review. This evidence includes West Palm Beach VAMC treatment records dated from 2017 to the present, with the explanation that now the Board need not remand this matter to the AOJ since the records have been provided. Also submitted was an August 2021 psychological evaluation from non-VA psychologist Jeffrey S. Speiden, Ph.D., along with this clinician's curriculum vitae. Service Connection Service connection may be established for disability resulting from personal injury suffered or disease contracted in the line of duty in the active military, naval, or air service or for aggravation of a preexisting injury suffered or disease contracted in line of duty. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110 (wartime), 1131 (peacetime). In general, 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 - the so-called "nexus" requirement. Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1362, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009). Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, diagnosed as PTSD, is granted. The Veteran contends a psychiatric disorder is due to service, specifically PTSD is due to a motor vehicle accident in October 1959. It is not in dispute that there was no psychiatric disorder noted or diagnosed in service or within many years of service separation. Rather, it is argued that post-service PTSD is attributable to the stressor of the documented in-service car accident. Service connection for PTSD requires medical evidence diagnosing the condition in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 4.125 (a); a link, established by medical evidence, between current symptoms and an in-service stressor; and credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressor occurred. We acknowledge the Veteran's reported stressor, the 1959 car accident in service, is not related to combat but is documented. He has sent in multiple lay statements, testified, and submitted a newspaper clipping detailing the incident. We also note that the 2017 VA compensation and pension psychiatric examination reflects no PTSD and no other psychiatric condition could be diagnosed. We relied upon this VA medical opinion in our now-vacated decision in large part to reach the conclusion that there was no current disability. Since that time, the Veteran, through his attorney, has submitted the August 2021 psychological evaluation from Dr. Speiden. This report not only provides a diagnosis of PTSD that "fully meets and exceeds DSM-IV and DSM-5 diagnostic criteria for PTSD, Chronic" based on the car accident as a stressor, it also explains that the September 2017 VA examiner, " erroneously discounted the veteran's credibility in the self-reporting of his psychiatric symptoms, which then led to that same examiner withholding the diagnosis reflected by those same reported symptoms; and, in my further professional opinion, led to that same examiner failing to diagnosis the veteran with PTSD." We have reviewed the opinion of Dr. Speiden and find it highly detailed and well-supported. It thoroughly addresses all of the relevant issues in this claim. Importantly, it provides an adequate diagnosis of PTSD based on the stressor of the car accident. It is not inconsistent with the documented record. Although not a model of clarity, the 2017 VA opinion appears to accept the existence of a stressor but finds other reasons for declining to make a diagnosis. However, the correct diagnosis may come from any competent source. Certainly, Dr. Speiden is a competent source, as reflected in his C.V. The evidence is at least in equipoise regarding whether the Veteran has been diagnosed with PTSD due to an in-service stressor which conforms to the DSM criteria. While acknowledging the 2017 VA examiner's opinion, the Board cannot reasonably disassociate Dr. Speigen's PTSD diagnosis and highly detailed nexus opinion, with the Veteran's car accident serving as the stressor. Upon review of the record, the Board finds the evidence to weigh in favor of a finding that the Veteran's current PTSD is due the accident in service. Accordingly, after resolving all doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Board finds that service connection for PTSD due to the accident during peacetime service is warranted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. The record supports the conclusion that all of the mental health symptoms currently present are attributable to PTSD and any attempt at differentiation would be artificial. See Dr. Speigen's opinion. H. N. SCHWARTZ Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board N. Rippel, 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.