Citation Nr: 21026454 Decision Date: 05/03/21 Archive Date: 05/03/21 DOCKET NO. 15-03 430 DATE: May 3, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include schizophrenia is denied. Entitlement to service connection for a gunshot wound is denied. Entitlement to a total disability based on individual unemployability (TDIU) is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The probative evidence of record does not establish that the Veteran's acquired psychiatric disorder has a relationship to any in-service occurrence or event. 2. The probative evidence of record does not establish that the Veteran's gunshot wound has a relationship to any in-service occurrence or event. 3. The Veteran had no service-connected disabilities. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include schizophrenia have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. 2. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for a gunshot wound have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. 3. The criteria for entitlement to a TDIU have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.340, 3.341, 4.16. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from May 1970 to March 1972. The Veteran attended a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in March 2016. A transcript of the hearing is of record. During the pendency of the appeal, the Veteran died in July 2018. In March 2021, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) granted substitution to the appellant over the current claims. Service Connection 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). For National Guard or Reserve service, service connection may only be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred or aggravated while on active duty for training (ACDUTRA or ADT), or for an injury incurred or aggravated during inactive duty training (INACDUTRA or IDT). 38 U.S.C. §§ 101(24), 106; 38 C.F.R. § 3.6. In adjudicating a claim for VA benefits, VA is responsible for determining whether the evidence supports the claim or is in relative equipoise, with the veteran prevailing in either event, or whether a preponderance of the evidence is against the claim, in which case the claim is denied. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b). VA is to resolve any reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor. 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. 1. Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include schizophrenia; and, 2. Entitlement to service connection for a gunshot wound The appellant contends that the Veteran's acquired psychiatric disorder warrants service connection. Specifically, the Veteran contended that his acquired psychiatric disorder was related to a gunshot wound he received in February 1973 while in the Army Reserve. VA treatment records note a diagnosis of an acquired psychiatric disorder. Additionally, medical treatment records from February 4, 1973 note treatment for a gunshot wound to the head. Accordingly, the first element of service connection is met. Shedden, supra. However, the Veteran's service treatment records (STRs) are silent for any in-service complaints or diagnoses related to his claimed acquired psychiatric disorder disability or a gunshot wound. Further, at the March 2016 Board hearing the Veteran specifically denied experiencing any mental health symptoms during service or experiencing any stressful incidents during service. The Veteran testified that he believed that his acquired psychiatric disorder symptoms were the result of the gunshot to his forehead in February 1973. However, the Veteran's gunshot wound occurred in February 1973 after separation from his period of active duty service in March 1972. The Veteran's service personnel records indicate that he was on stand-by reserve until May 1976, but not a period of active or inactive duty for training at that time. Therefore, while he may have been associated with a Reserve unit at the time of the gunshot wound, there is no evidence that it occurred during a period of service which qualifies for compensation. Accordingly, the second element of service connection is not met. In view of the above, the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim for service connection for a gunshot wound and an acquired psychiatric disorder. There is no in-service event or injury to which the Veteran's claimed disabilities may be linked. As the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim, the benefit of the doubt provision does not apply. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. The claims are denied. 3. Entitlement to a TDIU The appellant contends that the Veteran's disabilities prevented him from securing and maintaining gainful employment. A schedular total disability rating for compensation purposes may be assigned when the Veteran is unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation as a result of service-connected disabilities, provided that, if there is only one such disability, this disability shall be ratable at 60 percent or more, or if there are two or more disabilities, there shall be at least one ratable at 40 percent or more, and sufficient additional disability to bring the combined rating to 70 percent or more. 38 C.F.R. § 4.16 (a). An extraschedular total rating based on individual unemployability may be assigned to a veteran who fails to meet the percentage standards if he is unemployable by reason of his service-connected disabilities. 38 C.F.R. § 4.16 (b). In this case, the Veteran did not have any service-connected disabilities during his lifetime. For this reason, there is no legal basis upon which to consider the claim for a TDIU. The Board concludes that entitlement to a TDIU must be denied as a matter of law as there are no service-connected disabilities which could be found to be productive of individual unemployability. See Sabonis v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 426, 430 (1994) (noting that where the law and not the evidence is dispositive, the claim should be denied or the appeal to the Board terminated because of the absence of legal merit or the lack of entitlement under the law). Accordingly, the appeal is denied. Id. Bethany L. Buck Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board David M. Sebstead, 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.