Citation Nr: 21041352 Decision Date: 07/08/21 Archive Date: 07/08/21 DOCKET NO. 15-34 721 DATE: July 8, 2021 ORDER The issue of entitlement to service- connection for PTSD is denied. The issue of entitlement to service connection for bipolar II disorder is denied. FINDING OF FACT 1. The Veteran does not have a PTSD diagnosis which conforms to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth or Fifth Editions (DSM-4 and 5). 2. The Veteran's bipolar II disorder did not began during nor is it otherwise related to active service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, claimed as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304(f). VETERAN CONTENTIONS The Veteran asserts that he is entitled to service connection for a psychiatric condition that that he developed as a result of traumatic incidents in service. He reports that he experiences memories regarding three incidents that took place while he was in service that are like "wallpaper in [his] brain". In the first incident, the Veteran contends that while he attempted to break up a fight in Germany, a German knocked him onto a heating pipe. At the time, he thought he smelled chicken, but it was actually his hand burning. The Veteran asserts that his hand required a skin graft after the incident. In the second incident, the Veteran contends that a grenade blew up in a sergeant's face while the Veteran was in infantry school. After a grenade appeared to be a dud and was thrown in a barrel, the sergeant looked into the barrel at which time the grenade exploded. The sergeant's face was ruined. Finally, in the third incident, the Veteran contends that while in service he worked as a flame thrower during a teaching demonstration. When he pulled the back trigger, the hose hooked to the flame thrower broke off and, he contends, the napalm inside the tank sprayed the face of the blanket man whose job it was to stand behind the flame thrower and cover him or the tank if either he or the tank became engulfed in flames. The Veteran asserts that he can still recall the blanket man's face and head peeling from the chemical and his staring at the Veteran as if he was thinking "what did you do to me?". REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from August 1953 to September 1956. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2013 decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). It was previously before the Board in March 2021 at which time it was remanded for further development. The Board finds that the RO substantially complied with the Board's remand directives regarding the requested medical opinion. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ); a transcript of the proceeding is of record. Now, the Board finds that neither entitlement to service connection for PTSD nor entitlement to service connection for bipolar II disorder is warranted. Generally, to establish service connection, a showing of competent medical, or in certain circumstances, lay evidence must confirm (1) a current disability; (2) an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the current disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a); Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 116667 (Fed. Cir 2004). With respect to PTSD, there must be (1) medical evidence establishing a clear diagnosis of PTSD conforming to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5); (2) credible supporting evidence that a claimed in-service stressor actually occurred; and (3) competent evidence of a causal nexus between the current symptomatology and the claimed in-service stressor. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.304(f), 4.125(a) (2013); see Cohen v. Brown, 10 Vet. App. 128, 138 (1997). The Veteran currently has a bipolar II diagnosis, but the record does not reflect an in-service onset or treatment for the condition within one year of service. Neither does the record otherwise reflect the development of bipolar disorder within a year of the Veteran's separation from service. Additionally, a VA examiner found no causal relationship between the Veteran's bipolar disorder and his service. 4/19/2021 C&P Examination. Because the examiner provided a reasoned explanation with a clear conclusion supported by facts pulled from the record, the Board affords the examiner's opinion significant probative weight. Entitlement to service connection for bipolar II disorder is denied. Moving to the Veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD, the Veteran was afforded two VA examinations in furtherance of his claim. See 1/28/2011 C&P Examination; 4/19/2021 C&P Examination. In both examinations, it was determined that the Veteran does not meet the DSM criteria for a PTSD diagnosis. While the 2011 opinion was afforded no probative weight because it did not consider a previous PTSD diagnosis of record, the 2021 opinion is afforded significant probative weight. The 2021 opinion made clear that while the Veteran does have a PTSD diagnosis of record, that diagnosis was made utilizing a less comprehensive evaluation. According to the criteria established by the DSM, the Veteran's symptoms do not rise to the level necessary to establish a PTSD diagnosis. While the Board acknowledges and is sympathetic toward the Veteran's contentions, an analysis of his in-service stressors is not necessary because the diagnosis element has not been met. Service connection for PTSD is not warranted in this case. S.C. Krembs Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Z. Sloley, 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.