Citation Nr: 0001378 Decision Date: 01/14/00 Archive Date: 01/27/00 DOCKET NO. 95-14 151 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Muskogee, Oklahoma THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: The American Legion ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD L. Helinski, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran had active military service from August 1968 to May 1970. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA or Board) on appeal from a February 1995 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Muskogee, Oklahoma, which denied the benefit sought on appeal. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. All relevant evidence necessary for an equitable disposition of this appeal has been obtained by the RO. 2. The veteran did not engage in combat with the enemy. 3. There is no credible supporting evidence corroborating the existence of any of the veteran's claimed in-service stressors. 4. There is no diagnosis of PTSD that is based on verified in-service stressors. CONCLUSION OF LAW PTSD was not incurred or aggravated during the veteran's active military service. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1110, 5107 (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (1999); 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f), as in effect prior to and on March 7, 1997. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION The Board notes that this appeal was previously before the Board and remanded in April 1997 for additional development. The Board has reviewed the record and finds that the requested development has been completed. As such, the Board will proceed with disposition of this appeal. As a preliminary matter, the Board finds that the veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD is "well grounded" within the meaning of 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a). A claim for service connection for PTSD is well grounded when there is "[1] medical evidence of a current [PTSD] disability; [2] lay evidence (presumed to be credible for these purposes) of an in-service stressor, which in a PTSD case is the equivalent of in-service incurrence or aggravation; and [3] medical evidence of a nexus between service and the current PTSD disability." Cohen v. Brown, 10 Vet. App. 128, 137 (1997) (citations omitted). In the present case, the Board finds that the foregoing criteria are met, as follows. The record contains a diagnosis of PTSD in an October 1995 VA examination report. Additionally, the veteran contends that his stressors are based on his experiences aboard an aircraft carrier during his service in Vietnam. Furthermore, the examiner who provided the October 1995 diagnosis of PTSD indicated that the veteran had some features of PTSD based on his Vietnam experiences. As the veteran has met the threshold requirement of presenting evidence of a plausible or well grounded claim for service connection for PTSD, the next step is to evaluate whether the evidence supports an award of service connection. The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims has indicated that claims for service connection for PTSD must satisfy the following elements: 1) A current clear diagnosis of PTSD; 2) credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressor actually occurred; and 3) medical evidence of a causal nexus between the current PTSD symptomatology and the verified stressor(s). Cohen, 10 Vet. App. at 138. In the absence of any one element, the claim must fail. As noted above, the record reflects but a single diagnosis of PTSD, entered at the time of a VA examination in October 1995. At that time, the veteran reported having nightmares, which he believed were due to his experiences in Vietnam. The examiner indicated that the veteran presented "with some features consistent with [PTSD] based on his experiences in Vietnam; however, his long success with marriage of over 24 years, his gainful employment ... suggests that even though he might have feature (sic) of [PTSD] it has influenced his civilian life minimally." Other than the October 1995 diagnosis of PTSD, the record is negative for any findings or diagnoses of PTSD. VA examination reports dated in July 1970 and August 1979 are negative for any clinical findings of a psychiatric disorder; a period of VA hospitalization in February and March 1971 was for treatment of an inadequate personality. VA outpatient treatment records of September 1994 reveal that the veteran was examined for complaints of PTSD symptoms, including nightmares, with the clinical findings yielding a diagnostic impression of questionable PTSD. On a VA psychiatric examination in October 1994, it was found by the examiner that the veteran did not meet the criteria for diagnosis of PTSD; the Axis I diagnosis was of a somatization disorder. At the time of the October 1995 VA diagnosis of PTSD, there were no verified in-service stressors of record. Consequently, pursuant to the April 1997 BVA remand, an attempt was made to verify the veteran's claimed stressors. According to the veteran, his claimed stressors included fires and plane crashes on the deck of an aircraft carrier, where he served as a boatswain mate. He also indicated that he lost several buddies during his service in Vietnam, although he was unable to provide names or dates of specific incidents. A review of the record reveals that the veteran served in the Republic of Vietnam aboard an aircraft carrier. There is no evidence that the veteran was awarded any combat citations, nor is there any other evidence of record that the veteran engaged in combat with the enemy. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f), as in effect prior to March 7, 1997, and as amended March 7, 1997; VAOPGCPREC 12-99. As the veteran did not engage in combat with the enemy and appears to claim stressors that are not combat related, the veteran's lay testimony, by itself, is not sufficient to establish the occurrence of the alleged stressors. Instead, the record must contain service records or other evidence that corroborates the veteran's testimony or statements. See Cohen, 10 Vet. App. at 147; Zarycki v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 91, 98 (1993). In October 1997, the RO sent a request for stressor verification to the Department of the Army, U.S. Armed Service Center for Research of Unit Records. A response was received in May 1998, which confirmed that there had been several incidents of plane accidents on or near the aircraft carrier on which the veteran was stationed, the USS Kitty Hawk. However, there was no verification of any specific casualties, as the veteran did not provide names or dates. The RO offered the veteran an opportunity to present additional information, in light of the foregoing response from the U.S. Army, but the veteran indicated that he was unable to provide any more details. In August 1998, the veteran underwent another VA examination. The examiner reviewed the veteran's claims file, including his service medical records and the documents regarding the veteran's service on the USS Kitty Hawk. The examiner diagnosed the veteran with a depressive disorder, not otherwise specified. The examiner noted that the veteran had a steady work history, and had been married for 27 years. The examiner further indicated that the veteran's "primary symptom is the insomnia with bad dreams." The examiner was "not picking up any significant symptoms of hyper arousal or numbing or significant social withdrawal [thus, the examiner did] not feel that [the veteran met] the full criteria for [PTSD]." Rather, the examiner felt that the veteran demonstrated depressive symptoms. The Board has thoroughly reviewed all the evidence of record, as summarized above; however, the Board must conclude that the preponderance of evidence is against the veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for PTSD, and the appeal is denied. The elements necessary for establishing service connection for PTSD include corroboration that a claimed in- service stressor occurred, and a current diagnosis of PTSD that establishes a medical nexus, or link, between PTSD and one or more of the claimed, corroborated stressors. See Cohen, 10 Vet. App. at 137, 142-43, 147. That evidence is simply not present in this case. As pertinent to stressor verification, 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f) as in effect prior to March 7, 1997, provided that a grant of service connection for PTSD required credible supporting evidence that the stressor actually occurred and that, if the claimed stressor was related to combat, service department evidence that the veteran engaged in combat or was awarded the Purple Heart, Combat Infantryman Badge, or similar combat citation will be accepted, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, as conclusive evidence of the claimed inservice stressor. Such regulation was modified by regulatory change effected March 7, 1997, requiring "credible supporting evidence that the claimed stressor occurred" for a grant of service connection for PTSD. Also, the modified regulation provides that, if the evidence establishes that the veteran engaged in combat with the enemy and the claimed stressor is related to that combat, in the absence of clear and convincing evidence to the contrary, and provided the claimed stressor is consistent with the circumstances, conditions, or hardships of the veteran's service, the veteran's lay testimony alone may establish the occurrence of the claimed in-service stressor. See also Karnas v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 308, 312-313 (1991) (where the law or regulation changes after a claim has been filed or reopened, but before the administrative or judicial process has been concluded, the version most favorable to the veteran will be applied, unless Congress provided otherwise, or permitted the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to do otherwise and the Secretary did so). The attempts to verify the veteran's claimed stressors merely resulted in general information about airplane accidents on or near the aircraft carrier on which the veteran was stationed. There were no reports of mass casualties, etc. associated with such events. Furthermore, as the veteran was unable to provide specific names of buddies who reportedly died in service, there is no verification of such. However, notwithstanding the information received from the U.S. Army regarding the veteran's claimed stressors, the more recent VA examination report of record is negative for a PTSD diagnosis. Rather, the diagnosis was of a depressive disorder. The Board acknowledges the veteran's statements, reflected in his VA medical records, that during his military service he experienced fires aboard the USS Kitty Hawk, which frightened him. He also indicated that may of his buddies were killed in service. However, although the veteran's statements as to his claimed stressors are accepted as truthful for purposes of rendering the claim well-grounded, in order to establish service connection, such stressors must be supported by corroborating evidence. Id. The record reflects that VA has made several attempts to obtain more specific information from the veteran regarding his claimed stressors, but each attempt had negative results. Beyond generalized references to accidents on or near the USS Kitty Hawk, the record is devoid of any detailed incidents that are claimed to have contributed to the veteran's PTSD. Without more detailed information as to the veteran's claimed stressors, VA is unable to offer any further assistance to corroborate such events. In light of the foregoing, the Board must conclude that the veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD must be denied under both the "old" and "new" regulatory provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f) and Cohen, supra. Notwithstanding the diagnosis of PTSD of record, that diagnosis is not supported by a verified stressor. The Board notes that a diagnosis of PTSD based on an unverified stressor history is inadequate for establishing service connection. Cohen, 10 Vet. App. at 140; West v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 70, 77 (1994). Moreover, as the record does not otherwise present a verified (or verifiable) stressor upon which a diagnosis of PTSD could reasonably be made, further psychiatric evaluation of the veteran is unnecessary. Finally, the Board notes that the record reveals that the veteran was awarded disability benefits by the Social Security Administration, effective in April 1996. It does not appear that any attempts were made to obtain any medical records associated with that award, including a copy of the Social Security award decision. See Baker v. West, 11 Vet. App. 163, 169 (1998) (a failure to obtain Social Security records may be a violation of the duty to assist). However, the Board finds there is no prejudice to the veteran in not obtaining those records, as this decision is not being denied based on medical grounds, i.e., diagnosis or etiology, but rather, on the basis of a lack of verified stressors. Thus, any additional medical evidence would not alter the outcome of this appeal. See Bernard v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 384, 394 (1993) (a Board decision that a claimant will not be prejudiced must be supported by an adequate statement of reasons or bases). A preponderance of the evidence is against the veteran's claim, and, as such, the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(b) are not for application in this instance. ORDER Service connection for PTSD is denied. BRIAN J. MILMOE Acting Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals