Citation Nr: 21020820 Decision Date: 04/08/21 Archive Date: 04/08/21 DOCKET NO. 14-13 040 DATE: April 8, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, diagnosed as unspecified anxiety disorder is granted. FINDING OF FACT Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, his unspecified anxiety disorder is related to a July 1990 incident where a tent collapsed on the Veteran while he was in MOPP gear. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for unspecified anxiety disorder are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran honorably served in the United States Army from May 1985 to August 1985 and the United States Air Force from February 1991 to March 1991, February 2002 to September 2002, and May 2006 to September 2008. He has additional periods of service in the Minnesota Air National Guard. This matter appears before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal of an August 2011 rating decision of the Regional Office (RO) in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The Board has previously remanded the Veteran’s claim twice. Most recently, the Board remanded the Veteran’s claim to the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) in September 2019. The Board directed the AOJ to contact the Veteran to request additional information about his reported incident in training in which the tent collapsed on him while wearing MOPP gear, obtain pay records to determine the Veteran’s duty status in July 1990, and readjudicate the claim after the development was completed. VA requested the Veteran’s pay records in July 2020. These records were associated with the record in August 2020. In July 2020, VA sent the Veteran a letter requesting additional information about the incident. To date, no response has been received. In September 2020, the AOJ readjudicated the Veteran’s claim and issued a Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC). The Board finds substantial compliance with its September 2019 remand directives. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). The Board has limited the discussion below to the relevant evidence required to support its finding of fact and conclusion of law, as well as to the specific contentions regarding the case as raised directly by the Veteran and those reasonably raised by the record. See Scott v. McDonald, 789 F.3d 1375, 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2015); Robinson v. Peake, 21 Vet. App. 545, 552 (2008). Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include unspecified anxiety disorder The Board finds the evidence is at least in equipoise to support granting the Veteran’s claim of entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include unspecified anxiety disorder. The Veteran contends that his acquired psychiatric disorders are related to service. Specifically, the Veteran contends that he experiences symptoms in relation to an incident in service where a tent collapsed on him while he was wearing MOPP gear. He also contends that his job as a beneficiary assistance coordinator in service contributed to his current diagnoses. The Board finds that the evidence is at least in equipoise over whether the in-service event with the tent occurred, and, resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, service connection for unspecified anxiety disorder is warranted. Generally, service connection will be granted for a disability that was incurred or aggravated in the line of duty in the active military, naval, or air service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 101 (16), 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.1 (k), 3.303. Active military, naval, or air service includes any period of active duty for training (ACDUTRA) during which the individual concerned was disabled from a disease or injury incurred or aggravated in the line of duty. 38 U.S.C. §§ 101 (21) and (24); 38 C.F.R. § 3.6 (a). Active military, naval, or air service also includes any period of inactive duty for training (INACDUTRA) during which the individual concerned was disabled or died from an injury incurred or aggravated in the line of duty. 38 U.S.C. § 101 (24); 38 C.F.R. § 3.6 (a). During the pendency of the appeal, the Veteran has been diagnosed with various psychiatric disorders. During the October 2018 VA examination, the Veteran was diagnosed with unspecified anxiety disorder. In a December 2015 treatment note, the Veteran’s diagnoses are listed as PTSD, chronic; MDD, unspecified; and panic disorder. In a May 2014 treatment note, the Veteran’s diagnoses were panic disorder with agoraphobia; PTSD; and depressive disorder, not otherwise specified. The Veteran’s service treatment records are silent for complaints, treatment, or diagnosis of any psychiatric disorders. The Veteran has reported that an in-service incident caused his myriad psychiatric disorders. During his October 2018 VA examination, the Veteran recalled that he was wearing a chemical warfare suit in July 1990 when a tent collapsed on him and kept him trapped for approximately 15 minutes. In a November 2015 statement, the Veteran reported the incident occurred in July 1995. In an October 2015 treatment note, the Veteran recalled the incident occurred in the early 1990s. In an August 2013 treatment note, the Veteran reported that the incident occurred approximately 10 years ago. In an April 2013 treatment record, the Veteran recalled the event happened in the late 1990s. In a March 2018 statement, the Veteran said he had no additional information to provide about the timing of the incident because it was so long ago. The Board finds that while the reported date of the in-service incident varied, the rest of the details remained the same. The Veteran consistently reported that during training in July he was in MOPP gear when a tent collapsed and entrapped him. The Veteran’s pay records are associated with the record. In July 1990, the Veteran had 10 active duty pay days. In July 1992, the Veteran had 16 active duty pay days. In July 1993, the Veteran had 12 active duty pay days. In July 1994, the Veteran had eight active duty pay days. In July 1996, the Veteran had seven active duty pay days. In July 1997, the Veteran had six active duty pay days. In July 1998, the Veteran had five active duty pay days. The Veteran consistently had ACDUTRA in July during the 1990s. Accordingly, the Board finds that any reasonable doubt is resolved in the Veteran’s favor, and the event did occur during a period of ACDUTRA. The Veteran underwent VA examination in October 2018. The examiner diagnosed the Veteran with unspecified anxiety disorder. The examiner explained why the Veteran was not diagnosed with additional acquired psychiatric disorders during the examination. After discussing the tent incident in service, the examiner found that the Veteran did not endorse clinically significant frequency of intrusive symptoms and the stressor does not meet criterion A for PTSD. The examiner also noted the Veteran denied depression during the examination because he was involved in multiple activities during the summer. Further, the examiner explained that, while the Veteran was previously diagnosed with panic disorder, he has not experienced a panic attack since 2012, so this designation is no longer warranted. The examiner opined that the Veteran’s anxiety disorder is less likely than not related to his time as a beneficiary assistance counseling coordinator because it has minimal contribution in the totality of other more prominent life factors and does not rise to a clinically significant level in and of itself. However, the examiner did find that the Veteran’s anxiety disorder is partially contributed to by the Veteran being in a collapsed tent wearing MOPP gear. The examiner did note that the Veteran’s anxiety disorder is contributed to by other factors. In a May 2013 VA treatment note, the Veteran’s provider loosely opined that the Veteran’s PTSD-like symptoms are related to the tent incident described above. Specifically, the provider noted the event is directly related to his difficulty with having anything on his head and may also relate to other specific anxiety symptoms. The provider further discussed the Veteran is suffering from secondary or vicarious traumatization from his role as a beneficiary assistance counseling coordinator. The Veteran discusses the tent collapse in many other treatment records; however, the rest of the Veteran’s treatment records do not discuss a nexus opinion. The Board finds that the October 2018 VA examiner’s opinion in conjunction with the May 2013 treatment note show it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran’s unspecified anxiety disorder is related to service. While both providers discuss other life factors, including financial stress, work as a police officer, and familial tension, they both point to the in-service tent collapse as a contributing factor to the Veteran’s present anxiety. The Veteran consistently reported an in-service event where a tent collapsed on him while he was wearing full MOPP gear. The VA examiner and at least one provider have provided a link between this event and his current diagnosis, unspecified anxiety disorder. Again, resolving any reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, his current diagnosis is caused by his in-service event. Accordingly, the Board finds that entitlement to service connection for unspecified anxiety disorder is warranted. R. FEINBERG Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board S. N. Fournier, 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.