191002-36303

CourtBoard of Veterans' Appeals
DecidedFebruary 26, 2021
Docket191002-36303
StatusUnpublished

This text of 191002-36303 (191002-36303) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Board of Veterans' Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
191002-36303, (bva 2021).

Opinion

Citation Nr: AXXXXXXXX Decision Date: 02/26/21 Archive Date: 02/26/21

DOCKET NO. 191002-36303 DATE: February 26, 2021

ORDER

Entitlement to service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is granted.

Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus is denied.

Entitlement to service connection for a right hip condition is denied.

Entitlement to service connection for a left hip condition is denied.

REMANDED

Entitlement to service connection for a right shoulder condition is remanded.

Entitlement to service connection for a right knee condition is remanded.

Entitlement to service connection for a left knee condition is remanded.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. The evidence is sufficient to show that the Veteran’s current diagnosis of PTSD is related to a fear of hostile military or terrorist activity in service.

2. The evidence does not show that the Veteran’s diabetes mellitus had its onset in service, manifested to a compensable degree within one year of separation.

3. The evidence does not reflect current left or right hip disabilities.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The criteria for service connection for PTSD have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304(f).

2. The criteria for service connection for diabetes mellitus have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304, 3.307, 3.309.

3. The criteria for service connection for bilateral hip disabilities have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304, 3.307, 3.309.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

The Veteran had active duty from October 1989 to April 1996.

In the October 2019 VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal, the Veteran elected the Evidence Submission docket. Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) decision on appeal, as well as any evidence submitted by the Veteran within 90 days from receipt of the VA Form 10182. 38 C.F.R. § 20.303.

Evidence was added to the claims file during a period of time when new evidence was not allowed. As the Board is deciding the claims of service connection for right and left hip conditions, it may not consider this evidence in its decision. 38 C.F.R. § 20.300. The Veteran may file a Supplemental Claim and submit or identify this evidence. 38 C.F.R. § 3.2501. If the evidence is new and relevant, VA will issue another decision on the claim, considering the new evidence in addition to the evidence previously considered. Id. Specific instructions for filing a Supplemental Claim are included with this decision.

Evidence regarding the Veteran’s right shoulder claim was also added to the claims file during a period of time when new evidence was not allowed. As the Board is remanding the claim for further development, this additional evidence will be considered by the RO in the adjudication of those claims.

Service Connection

To establish service connection for a disability, the evidence must show: (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. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

For certain chronic disorders, such as diabetes mellitus, service connection may be granted if the disease becomes manifest to a compensable degree within one year following separation from active duty. See 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1112, 1113, 1131, 1137; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307, 3.309.

When a disease listed at 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a) is not shown to be chronic during service or the one-year presumptive period, service connection may also be established by showing continuity of symptomatology after service. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b). However, the use of continuity of symptoms to establish service connection is limited only to those diseases listed at 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a) and does not apply to other disabilities which might be considered chronic from a medical standpoint. See Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2013).

1. Entitlement to service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD)

Generally, to establish entitlement to service connection for PTSD, there must be: (1) medical evidence diagnosing the condition in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 4.125(a); (2) a link, established by medical evidence, between the current symptoms and an in-service stressor; and (3) credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressor occurred. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f).

The relevant regulation provides that if a stressor is related to the Veteran’s fear of hostile military or terrorist activity and a VA psychiatrist or psychologist, or a psychiatrist or psychologist with whom VA has contracted, confirms that the claimed stressor is adequate to support a diagnosis of PTSD and that the Veteran’s symptoms are related to the claimed stressor, in the absence of clear and convincing evidence to the contrary, and provided the claimed stressor is consistent with the places, types, and circumstances of the Veteran’s service, the Veteran’s lay testimony alone may establish the occurrence of the claimed in-service stressor.

Here, the February 2019 VA contract psychological evaluation performed by a psychologist indicates the Veteran has a current diagnosis of PTSD due to such a stressor based on fear of hostile military or terrorist activity. After careful consideration of the evidence regarding this stressor and the Veteran’s service, the Board finds that there is not clear and convincing evidence to the contrary and that the stressor is consistent with the circumstances of the Veteran’s service. On this basis, service connection for PTSD is granted.

2. Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus.

The Veteran asserts that he developed diabetes while on active duty but was diagnosed shortly after separation.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Ray A. Mc Clain v. R. James Nicholson
21 Vet. App. 319 (Veterans Claims, 2007)
Walker v. Shinseki
708 F.3d 1331 (Federal Circuit, 2013)
Saunders v. Wilkie
886 F.3d 1356 (Federal Circuit, 2018)
Gilbert v. Derwinski
1 Vet. App. 49 (Veterans Claims, 1990)
McLendon v. Nicholson
20 Vet. App. 79 (Veterans Claims, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
191002-36303, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/191002-36303-bva-2021.