Citation Nr: 21023341 Decision Date: 04/20/21 Archive Date: 04/20/21 DOCKET NO. 15-33 941 DATE: April 20, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability, other than posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is denied. FINDING OF FACT The preponderance of the evidence is against finding that an acquired psychiatric disability other than PTSD began during active service, or is otherwise related to an in-service injury or disease. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability, other than PTSD have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had honorable active military service from November 1986 through November 4, 1989. The Veteran’s service from November 5, 1989 to March 9, 1995, is dishonorable for VA purposes. 38 C.F.R. § 3.12(d)(4). Compensation benefits may not be awarded based on the Veteran’s period of dishonorable service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.12 (a), (b). This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal of a February 2015 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). This matter was last before the Board in March 2019, at which time the Board remanded it for further development. That development has been completed. Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability, other than PTSD. The Veteran contends that he has an acquired psychiatric disability other than PTSD that was incurred in service, or that is otherwise attributable to an in-service event, injury or disease. He asserts that he has an acquired psychiatric disability related to his Persian Gulf War service. He had service in Southwest Asia from September 8, 1990, through March 9, 1991. See DD Form 214. Service connection may be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. The three-element test for service connection requires evidence of: (1) a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the current disability and the in-service disease or injury. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166 -67 (Fed. Cir. 2004). The question for the Board is whether the Veteran has a current disability that began during service or is at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. The Board concludes that, while the Veteran has diagnoses of adjustment disorder and depressive disorder, the preponderance of the evidence is against finding that any diagnosis began during active service, or is otherwise related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. A review of the Veteran’s service treatment records documents an undated counseling note related to marital problems as well as stress and anger management. The Veteran’s spouse was threatening divorce at that time. Rule out panic attacks, rule out bereavement and material problems were assessed. Notably, while this record is undated, the note is from Ft. Wainright, AK, and Veteran served at this location only during his second period of dishonorable service. The Veteran was convicted of larceny in November 1993. A July 1993 medical clinic note documents that the Veteran was evaluated for medical clearance for confinement and physical labor. The Veteran reported occasional suicidal thoughts. However, psychiatric examination was normal at discharge. A private medical record dated in May 2003 documents that the Veteran was brought in by the police for medical clearance to be admitted for care. The Veteran had been making threats to himself and others, and police had found a loaded gun with ammunition. The Veteran was assessed with antisocial personality disorder, as well as adjustment disorder with mixed disturbance of emotion and conduct. He was treated for a few days and released. A September 2014 VA treatment record documents assessment of an adjustment disorder, as well as depressive disorder. The Veteran’s wife had left him and his children a few weeks ago, and he was experiencing stress working full-time with little support. Of record is a May 2017 VA mental health note. The note documents stressors of homelessness, extreme poverty/low income, unspecified housing or economic problems and other problem related to employment. The Veteran was considering relocating to find better work. The Board acknowledges that the Veteran experienced stress and anger during his second period of service and had reported suicidal ideation during that period. However, because these events occurred during the Veteran’s period of dishonorable service, they cannot form the basis of a service connection award. On the other hand, the evidence demonstrates that an acquired psychiatric disability other than PTSD, to include depressive disorder, first manifested in approximately 2003 as the result of post-service stressors. The Board acknowledges the Veteran’s assertions that he has an acquired psychiatric disability other than PTSD related to his service in Southwest Asia. However, the Veteran’s service in Southwest Asia occurred during a period of dishonorable service, and the Board cannot award benefits based upon this period of service. Otherwise, no competent evidence indicates that an acquired psychiatric disability is attributable to the Veteran’s initial, honorable, period of service. Rather, the evidence shows that an acquired psychiatric disability, more likely than not, manifested decades after service as the result of post-service psychosocial stressors. See e.g. May 2017 VA Mental Health Note. While the Veteran believes his acquired psychiatric disability other than PTSD is related to service, the Board reiterates that the preponderance of the evidence weighs against finding that an in-service injury, event, or disease occurred during a period of honorable service. To the extent any personality disorders have been assessed, the Board notes that these are not subject to service connection. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303(c), 4.9, 4.127; see also Winn v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 510, 516 (1996). R.R. WATKINS Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Joseph R. Keselyak, 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.