Citation Nr: 21005652
Decision Date: 02/02/21	Archive Date: 02/02/21

DOCKET NO. 18-04 825
DATE: February 2, 2021

ORDER

Service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is granted.

FINDING OF FACT

The Veteran claims a psychiatric disability related to several specific stressors related to the risk and stress involved with his job loading and unloading armed ordinances from aircraft and the fear of being killed either in the course of those duties or during combat operations. Personnel records confirm that his ship, the U.S.S. Ticonderoga, participated in combat operations between October 1966 and May 1967, that the Veteran was authorized for a special commendation along with all crew mates for such service, and that he worked as an ordinance mechanic. Statements from fellow crew mates confirm his job involved arming fighter jets with bombs, missiles, and other ordinance. Although a January 2018 VA examination report which found he did not meet the diagnostic criteria for PTSD, this examiner appears not to have considered the Veteran’s competent and credible statements and, therefore, cannot be assigned as much probative weight as the more recent February and November 2018 letters from his treating VA clinical psychologist showing he does meet those criteria, listing the specific symptoms supporting the diagnosis, and opining that his PTSD is due to traumas he experienced while in the Navy. Considering the above and the liberalizing laws regarding PTSD due to fear-related stressors in service, the Board finds the evidence is at least in relative equipoise as to whether the Veteran has PTSD related to his reported in-service stressors.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for service connection for PTSD are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1113, 5107(b) (2018); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(b), 3.304(f), (2020).

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

The appellant is a Veteran who served on active duty from December 1965 to September 1969. This matter is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2015 rating decision appealed in a timely November 2015 notice of disagreement (NOD) and perfected by a timely January 2018 substantive appeal in response to statement of the case (SOC) earlier that month. In January 2021, a hearing was held before the undersigned. As the Board grants the benefit sought in full for the reasons outlined in detail above, there is no need for further detailed analysis at this time.

 

 

VICTORIA MOSHIASHWILI

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans’ Appeals

Attorney for the Board	M. Yuan, 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.