Citation Nr: 21007110 Decision Date: 02/08/21 Archive Date: 02/08/21 DOCKET NO. 16-54 123 DATE: February 8, 2021 ORDER Service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is denied. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran’s PTSD was not caused by or incurred during his service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria to establish entitlement to service connection for PTSD are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1110, 5103, 5103A; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.159, 3.303, 3.304. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active service from March 1987 to August 1997. This matter was previously before the Board of Veteran’s Appeals (Board) in November 2019 when the issue of entitlement to service connection for PTSD was remanded for further development. In particular, the Regional Office (RO) was instructed to permit the Veteran a period of additional time to submit the names, pay grades/ranks and rates of all personnel who were parties to or the witnesses of the incidents that he described as stressors. Pursuant to the November 2019 Board remand, in December 2019, VA requested that the Veteran provide information necessary to develop his claim. The Veteran was notified that he had 30 days to respond, and that if a response was not received within 30 days, a decision may be made on his claim. Again, in January 2020, VA requested that the Veteran provide information necessary to develop his claim. The Veteran was again notified that he had 30 days to respond. In February 2020, the Veteran requested additional time to provide the requested information. However, he did not specify the length of additional time requested. As of the date of this decision, the Veteran has not provided the requested information, and the Board will adjudicate this matter. The claimant has the responsibility to “adequately identify” those records and authorize VA to obtain them. Loving v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 96, 102-03 (2005). VA is not required to develop the claim with the claimant performing only a passive role. Turk v. Peake, 21 Vet. App. 565, 568 (2008). While VA has a duty to assist the veteran in substantiating his claim, that duty is not a one- way street. Woods v. Gober, 14 Vet. App. 214 (2000); see also Hurd v. West, 13 Vet. App. 449 (2000) (the Veteran cannot passively wait for help from VA). In January 2020, VA notified the Veteran that the Defense Personnel Records Information Retrieval System (DPRIS) was contacted in an attempt to obtain his service personnel records. However, DPRIS notified VA that no documents could be found. VA notified the Veteran that the records cannot be located and that a determination was made that all efforts to obtain the needed information had been exhausted and that further attempts to obtain the records would be futile. The Veteran was notified that he should submit any relevant documents in his possession. However, as of the date of this decision, the Veteran has not submitted any additional documents. Further development having been completed in accordance with the November 2019 Board remand; the matter is once again before the Board. Service Connection Service connection may be granted for current disability arising from disease or injury incurred or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. § § 1110. Service connection may be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § § 3.303(d). Service connection generally requires (1) medical evidence of a current disability; (2) medical or, in certain circumstances, lay evidence of in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) medical evidence of a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the current disability. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). The Board is responsible for determining whether the evidence supports the claim, with the veteran prevailing, or whether a preponderance of the evidence is against the claim, in which case the claim is denied. 38 U.S.C. § § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102. When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, the VA shall give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant. 38 U.S.C. § § 5107(b). Service connection for PTSD is denied. The Veteran contends that he has PTSD that is related to his service. The Veteran does not contend that he has any other psychiatric disorders that are related to his service. Thus, the forthcoming analysis will focus solely on service connection for PTSD. For the reasons set forth below, service connection for PTSD is not warranted. 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. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f). The provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 4.125(a) require that a diagnosis of a mental disorder conform to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fifth Edition (DSM-V). If the evidence establishes that the veteran engaged in combat with the enemy and the claimed stressor is consistent with the circumstances, conditions, and hardships of the veteran's service, the veteran's lay testimony alone may establish the occurrence of the claimed in-service stressor. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f). VA medical records show that the Veteran has a current diagnosis of PTSD. Accordingly, the first element of service connection for PTSD is met. The evidence does not show that the Veteran was engaged in combat during his service. In a September 2019 statement in support of claim for service connection for PTSD, the Veteran described three stressors. The first stressor was described as occurring between May 10, 1994 and June 24, 1994, when a shipmate hung himself while aboard the USS Kitty Hawk at Coronado Naval Base. The Veteran stated that he was assigned to the G-3 Weapons Department at the time. He stated that he was on a temporary duty assignment to the Master-at-Arms. The Veteran alleged that he was tasked with guarding the scene until NCIS could arrive. The second stressor was described as occurring between December 1, 1995 and December 30, 1995. The Veteran alleged that another shipmate hung himself while aboard the USS Kitty Hawk at Coronado Naval Base. The Veteran stated that he was assigned to the G-3 Weapons Department at the time. He stated that he was on a temporary duty assignment to the Master-at-Arms. The Veteran alleged that he was tasked with guarding the scene until NCIS could arrive. The third stressor was described as occurring on January 16, 1991, when an F-14 naval aircraft crashed on the flight deck of the USS Ranger, in the Persian Gulf, while he was aboard. The Veteran stated that he was assigned to the Engineering Department at the time. He stated that the aircraft hit two A-6 aircraft that he was loading ordinance onto at the time. He stated that no one was injured or killed during the incident. With regard to the first and second described stressors, as noted above, DPRIS notified VA that no documents could be found. Additionally, VA requested additional information necessary to develop the Veteran’s claim in December 2019 and January 2020. However, as noted above, as of the date of this decision, the Veteran has not responded to the requests for additional information. With regard to the third described stressor, the U.S. Army and Joint Services Records Research Center (JSRRC) notified VA in April 2014 that an aircraft crash did not occur while the USS Ranger was in the Persian Gulf; rather, research indicates that a crash occurred while the vessel was off the coast of San Diego in July 1991. However, the Veteran was not found to be stationed on the USS Ranger at that time, and he does not contend such. Although the Veteran contends that his PTSD is related to the stressors described above, as discussed above, there is no credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressors occurred. Accordingly, since there is no verified stressor, service connection for PTSD must be denied. In conclusion, the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim for service connection for PTSD. As the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim, the benefit-of-the-doubt rule does not apply, and the claim for service connection for PTSD must be denied. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); see generally Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990); Ortiz v. Principi, 274 F.3d 1361 (Fed Cir. 2001). Vito A. Clementi Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Timothy T. Emmart 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.