Citation Nr: 21024266 Decision Date: 04/22/21 Archive Date: 04/22/21 DOCKET NO. 14-41 033 DATE: April 22, 2021 ORDER Service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is denied. A total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The evidence does not show that the Veteran has a diagnosis of PTSD, which can be linked to any corroborated in-service stressor. 2. The Veteran is not service connected for any disabilities. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for service connection for PTSD have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304, 3.307, 3.309. 2. The criteria for TDIU have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 501; 38 C.F.R. § 4.16. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from March 1976 to March 1978, to include service in Korea from September 1976 to September 1977. He also served in the Army Reserves from December 1975 to March 1976 and from March 1978 to December 1987. The matters have been before the Board multiple times. Most recently, an October 2020 Board decision reopened the service connection claim for PTSD, and remanded the service connection claim along with the TDIU claim to the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) for re-adjudication. Of note, the October 2020 Board decision specifically denied the re-opening of previously denied service connection claim for schizophrenia and denied the service connection claim for depression. As the October 2020 Board decision is a final decision on these two claims, they will not be discussed in this decision. Moreover, this decision will not be expanded beyond PTSD to any acquired psychiatric disability, as the other acquired psychiatric disabilities claimed were already denied by the Board. PTSD The Veteran is seeking service connection for PTSD, which he believes, was a result of his military service. Service connection will be granted if the evidence demonstrates that a current disability resulted from an injury or disease incurred in or aggravated by active military service. 38 U.S.C. § 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Service connection requires competent evidence showing: (1) the existence of a present disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the present disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service (nexus). Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Service connection for PTSD specifically requires that the record show: (1) a current medical diagnosis of PTSD in accordance with 38 C.F.R.§ 4.125, (2) combat status or credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressor actually occurred; (3) medical evidence of a causal nexus between diagnosed PTSD and the claimed in-service stressor. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (f). Service treatment records (STRs) do not show any diagnosis or treatment of PTSD or any complaints of other mental health issues during service. VA treatment records show that the Veteran sought initial mental health treatment in May 1981 (approximately three years after separating from active duty) for auditory hallucinations. His wife reported that the family was under pressure for financial and other problems, and the Veteran was diagnosed with schizophrenia at that time. Subsequent VA treatment records consistently show a diagnosis of schizophrenia and do not shown a diagnosis of PTSD. Records from the Social Security Administration (SSA) show that the Veteran started receiving social security disability benefits from 1985 due to schizophrenia, and the SSA medical records do not show a diagnosis of PTSD. Private treatment records do not show that the Veteran has been diagnosed with PTSD. Of note, the Veteran indicated that he received medical treatment from the Donaldson Correction Facility and Bullock Correctional Facility. The AOJ contacted the correctional facilities multiple times to request the Veteran’s medical records, but no response was ever received by VA. As the evidence of record does not show that the Veteran has been diagnosed with PTSD, service connection for PTSD is not warranted. In the absence of proof of a present disability, there can be no valid claim. Brammer v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 223, 225 (1992). In addition, the records do not show that the Veteran had experienced an in-service stressor that is corroborated by other evidence of the record. The Veteran testified before the AOJ in September 1987, that he served one year in the demilitarized zone (DMZ) in Korea as a fires direction officer in field artillery, that this job was stressful; that at one time he was alerted to be scheduled to go to war positions. He denied any stressful event during his service in the Army Reserves, and stated that he actually enjoyed the summer camps in the Reserves. In a written statement in April 2009, the Veteran stated that he was assigned to an emergency ation facility in preparation to go to war during service. In a written statement in June 2010, the Veteran stated that he was deployed to a war position in the demilitarized zone (DMZ) in Korean in May 1977 after two Army officers were axed in DMZ. Service personnel records show that the Veteran served in Korean from September 1976 to September 1977 during peace time. Personnel records also show that he was a fire direction officer in Korea with additional duties include battery supply, communications, physical security, and dining facility. The records do not show that he had been assigned to a war position. In September 2009, after conducting research into potential evidence which could corroborate the stressor stated by the Veteran, the AOJ made a final determination that there was lack of information reported to corroborate the stressor(s) associated with the PTSD claim, and that the Veteran’s service records did not contain any combat awards or medals during his military service. While the Veteran contended that he experienced certain stressful event(s) during his service in Korea, there is no other evidence to corroborate his assertions. The records show that he served during peace time and had not been deployed in a war position. He admitted in the hearing before the AOJ in September 1987, that he was merely given an alert that he might be scheduled to go to a war position. Absent corroborating evidence, lay statement of a veteran alone is not sufficient to establish in-service stressor in a non-combat situation. Stone v. Nicholson, 480 F. 32 1111(2007). As such, the stressor element required by PTSD could not be established. The Board notes that the Veteran has not been afforded a VA examination in relation to this claim. Here, VA’s duty to provide the Veteran with an examination has not been triggered. The available medical evidence does not show a diagnosis of PTSD. While the Veteran is competent to provide a description of psychiatric symptoms, he lacks the training or credentials needed to provide a psychiatric diagnosis or its etiology. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F. 3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Additionally, the evidence does not show a corroborated in-service stressor. Accordingly, no examination or medical opinion is required. Waters v. Shinseki, 601 F.3d 1274 (Fed. Cir. 2010). As the evidence does not show that the Veteran has a current diagnosis of PTSD or a corroborated in-service stressor, service connection for PTSD is denied. TDIU A TDIU may be assigned where the schedular rating is less than total when the disabled person is, in the judgment of the Board, unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation as a result of his service-connected disabilities. 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a). Here, as the Veteran does not have any service-connected disability, there no basis to consider a TDIU claim. Accordingly, the TDIU claim is denied. MATTHEW W. BLACKWELDER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Q. Wang, 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.