Citation Nr: 21009407 Decision Date: 02/22/21 Archive Date: 02/22/21 DOCKET NO. 18-11 136 DATE: February 22, 2021 ORDER Service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is denied. Service connection for other specified trauma and stressor disorder with anxiety is granted. FINDING OF FACT 1. The preponderance of the evidence is against a finding that the Veteran has a diagnosis of PTSD in accordance with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5). 2. The evidence is in relative equipoise that the Veteran’s other specified trauma and stressor disorder with anxiety was caused by his active duty service. CONCLUSION OF LAW 1. The criteria for service connection for PTSD are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304, 4.125. The criteria for service connection for other specified trauma and stressor disorder with anxiety are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from November 1961 to April 1964. These matters come before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2015 rating decision from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In October 2019, the Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge at a videoconference hearing. A transcript of the hearing has been associated with the electronic file. At the hearing, the Veteran’s motion to advance these matters on the docket was granted on the record pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c). 1. Service connection for PTSD is denied. 2. Service connection for other specified trauma and stressor disorder with anxiety is granted. In October 2020, the Board recharacterized the claim for service connection for PTSD so it would include an acquired psychiatric disorder, and remanded for a VA examination. The Board concludes that the Veteran has a current psychiatric disability that is related to in-service traumatic events and his duties on the flight line. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1363, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). In November 2020, the Veteran was provided a VA examination. The VA examiner found that the Veteran did not meet the DSM-V criteria for PTSD since his stressors were not verified although some symptoms were found. See C&P Exam received 11/05/2020 at page 6. The Board finds that the preponderance of the evidence weighs against service connection for PTSD because his lay statements alone cannot establish an in-service occurrence since he had no in-service diagnosis of PTSD, served during peacetime, his stressor is not related to fear of hostile military activity, and he is not a prisoner of war. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f); see also Cohen v. Brown, 10 Vet. App. 128, 131 (1997). Additionally, he does not have a DSM-V diagnosis of PTSD as required. Id.; see also 38 C.F.R. § 4.125(a). As noted in October 2020 remand, the Veteran’s representative acknowledged that the Veteran does not have a formal diagnosis of PTSD and is not being treated for a mental health condition. Based on the foregoing, service connection for PTSD is denied. However, the Veteran was diagnosed with other specified trauma disorder with an active symptom of anxiety at the November 2020 VA mental disorders examination. In the medical opinion, the November 2020 VA examiner stated that the Veteran’s other specified traumatic stressor related disorder is at least as likely as not caused by or related to his service since the examiner found no pre-military mental health issues and no pre-military or post-military trauma. Id. at page 6. Accordingly, the November 2020 VA examiner reasoned that the mental health diagnosis and his anxiety was likely related to his service, since the Veteran reported that he witnessed a person have their leg run over by a plane, and he almost walked into the propeller of a plane when a pilot brought it in too quickly. In an addendum opinion, the examiner confirmed her diagnosis and restated the positive nexus to service. The Board finds that the medical opinion is entitled to great probative weight as the examiner made her findings based upon an in-person examination of the Veteran and diagnosed him with a mental health disorder that conforms to the DSM-5 criteria. The Board acknowledges that there is evidence against the claim including that the Veteran has never been treated for a mental illness, denies any functional impact of his current condition, and had no in-service mental health treatment or diagnosis. That said, the Board gives more probative weight to the medical opinion on record and the VA examiner’s finding of a positive nexus to the Veteran’s active duty service since his lay statement comports with his in-service duties as an airport serviceman. Lastly, though the Veteran denied any functional impact of his condition, the examiner found that his mental health symptoms have a mild impact on his social and occupational functioning.   Upon review of the record, the Board finds the evidence is at least in equipoise as to whether the Veteran’s current other specified trauma and stressor disorder with anxiety is related to service. Accordingly, after resolving all doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Board finds that service connection for other specified trauma and stressor disorder with anxiety is warranted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. Paul Sorisio Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Dixon, 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.