Citation Nr: 21028926 Decision Date: 05/12/21 Archive Date: 05/12/21 DOCKET NO. 20-15 056 DATE: May 12, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran does not currently have a diagnosis of PTSD based upon a verified stressor event. 2. The Veteran's diagnosed acquired psychiatric disabilities other than PTSD were manifested many years after service separation and are not related to disease or injury or other event in active service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD, have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from February 1966 to January 1969. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal of a December 2017 rating decision. In April 2021, the Veteran provided testimony at a Board hearing. A transcript of the hearing is of record. Service Connection Generally, in order to prove service connection, a veteran must show: (1) a present disability; (2) an 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, the so-called "nexus" requirement. See Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Establishing service connection for PTSD requires: (1) medical evidence diagnosing PTSD; (2) credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressor actually occurred; and (3) medical evidence of a link between current symptomatology and the claimed in-service stressor. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (f). Unless PTSD is diagnosed in service and the in-service stressor is related to service, or, when PTSD is diagnosed after service, the in-service stressor is related to combat or to fear of hostile military or terrorist activity or to a prisoner-of-war experience, or to a personal assault, the veteran's lay testimony alone may not establish the occurrence of an alleged noncombat in-service stressor and the record must contain credible supporting evidence that the alleged noncombat in-service stressor actually occurred. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (f). In general, "after-the-fact medical nexus evidence," such as a VA examiner's finding that a claimant's PTSD was caused by the alleged in-service stressor, cannot by itself serve as credible supporting evidence of the claimed in-service stressor. See Moreau v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 389, 396 (1996). 1. Acquired Psychiatric Disorder, to include PTSD Review of the Veteran's service treatment records reveals no diagnosis or treatment for a psychiatric condition. Post-service medical records show that the Veteran has been treated for bipolar disorder, anxiety disorder and PTSD. The Veteran has submitted various statements and hearing testimony in support of his claim. In a June 2017 statement, the reported hearing mortar attacks and small arms fire while serving in South Korea. He stated that his right wrist had been cut wide open after the mortar attack from shrapnel, and that the scar was still visible. He reported that while traveling in a van, he hit and killed small children. He also reported that he received the Purple Heart Award. Based on the information provided, the RO requested verification from the Joint Service Records Research Center (JSRRC). In October 2017, the JSRRC responded that there was no documentation that the HHC 3rd Brigade, 179th Signal Platoon was a valid unit in Korea during 1967. Initially, the Board notes that the records show that the Veteran did not serve in combat. Despite his assertion, the Veteran's personnel records do not show that he received the Purple Heart Award. Moreover, while he did serve in Korea, he was not involved in any combat activity. The Veteran was assigned to the 20th General Support Group, 304th Signal Battalion, South Korea, from December 1966 to January 1968. Also, the service treatment records do not show that the Veteran was treated for a shrapnel wound to his right wrist. Moreover, the JSRRC was unable to verify the Veteran's reported incidents, to include both his claimed mortar attacks and the incident involving Korean children while stationed in Korea. As such, the Board finds that there is no verified stressor, as there is no credible supporting evidence that the stressor occurred. At his April 2021 hearing, the Veteran described additional stressor, namely being assaulted at a civilian airport in Seattle when returning from Korea. The Veteran described being confronted by a group of protestors in the airport, and that the protesters "egged" him, spat on him, called him names, ripped his hat off his head and stole it, took his medals of his chest, and urinated on him. The Board does not find the description of this claimed incident to be credible. Despite the existence of anti-war protesters during the 1960s, the idea that, in the middle of a commercial airport, a soldier would be confronted by protesters who assaulted him including throwing eggs on him and urinating on him is not credible, and no further inquiry is warranted as to that stressor. In view of the lack of credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressors actually occurred, a basis upon which to establish service connection for PTSD has not been presented. The Veteran has been diagnosed with bipolar disorder and anxiety disorder, apart from PTSD. Notably, his service treatment records reveal no psychiatric complaints or diagnoses and he did not seek treatment/evaluation for any mental health concerns for several years following service discharge. Nothing in these facts suggests a disease or injury incurred in service resulted in a post-service psychiatric and no medical or otherwise competent evidence links such disability to service. Accordingly, the Board finds that service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, other than PTSD, must also be denied. Finally, the Board recognizes that the Veteran was not afforded a VA examination with respect to this issue. However, no examination is necessary for the adjudication of this claim as there is no credible evidence of record with respect to the existence of an in-service event, injury, or disease or any evidence of an association between the Veteran's claimed disorder and his service. To the extent that there was a duty to attempt to verify the claimed stressor, such was accomplished. There is clearly sufficient competent medical evidence of record to adjudicate the Veteran's claim. 38 U.S.C. § 5103A(d); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(4). The Board does not find that there is sufficient evidence to require a VA examination or to obtain a medical opinion. Evan M. Deichert Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Henriquez, 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.