BIPOLAR DISORDER (MANIC-DEPRESSIVE PSYCHOSIS)

Summary

The veteran, who served in the U.S. Navy from September 2005 to October 2005, appeals the denial of service connection for bipolar disorder, type II. The Board reviewed the evidence, including the veteran's testimony and a July 2012 VA examination. The VA examiner diagnosed bipolar disorder, type II, but opined it was less likely than not related to service, suggesting a pre-existing condition. However, the Board noted that while the veteran received psychiatric treatment shortly after enlistment, he was found normal upon examination, leading the Board to find the presumption of soundness upon entry to service was not rebutted. The Board found the veteran's consistent lay statements credible and probative, indicating the psychiatric disability began in service and has continued. Given the veteran's normal entrance physical, the consistent lay evidence, and resolving all doubt in the veteran's favor, the Board granted service connection for a psychiatric disability. The Board found the criteria for service connection were met, specifically noting that the evidence did not clearly and unmistakably show the bipolar disorder pre-existed service or was not aggravated by it. Service connection for bipolar disorder, type II, is granted.

Rationale

RO favorably found diagnosis of bipolar disorder, type II, and treated in service.; Veteran found normal upon examination shortly after enlistment.; Presumption of soundness upon entrance to service not rebutted.; Consistent lay statements found credible and probative.; Resolving all doubt in veteran's favor, service connection granted.

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: A26039468
Decision Date: 04/28/26	Archive Date: 04/28/26

DOCKET NO. 221005-282980
DATE: April 28, 2026

ORDER

Service connection for bipolar disorder, type II, is granted. 

FINDING OF FACT

The Veteran's psychiatric disability was not noted at entry and the evidence does not clearly and unmistakably show that the Veteran's bipolar disorder existed prior to service and was not aggravated during service.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for service connection for bipolar disorder, type II, have been met.  38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1111, 1154(a), 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.159, 3.303, 3.304.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

The Veteran served on active duty with the United States Navy from September 2005 to October 2005.

This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a September 2022 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). 

In the October 2022 VA Form 10182 (Notice of Disagreement), the Veteran elected the Hearing docket. 

In April 2026, the Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ). 

During the hearing, the Veteran waived 90-day period following the proceeding during which she could submit additional evidence in support of her appeal.  38 C.F.R. § 20.300(b).  In addition, in a statement dated and received by VA the day following the hearing, the Veteran's representative affirmatively waived the 90-day period following the proceeding.  As such, and because the granting in full the benefit sought on appeal, the Board will proceed with the claim. 

As a final initial matter, during the April 2026 hearing, the Veteran indicated that a grant of service connection for bipolar disorder would satisfy this appeal.  See AB v. Brown, 6 Vet. App.?35 (1993). 

Service Connection

Service connection for bipolar disorder is granted. 

The Veteran reports that his current psychiatric disability began while on active duty and has been present since then.  During the April 2026 hearing, the Veteran testified that, during service, he started to have psychiatric symptoms due to the stressors of having to wake up early and often and due to people constantly yelling at him.  The Veteran testified that he has had severe psychiatric symptoms since his discharge from service. 

The Veteran's representative echoed the Veteran's contentions and argued that the Veteran did not have a psychiatric diagnosis prior to entry into service. 

Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred or aggravated during active military service.  38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a).  Disorders diagnosed after discharge will be service connected if all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service.  38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). 

Generally, service connection requires (1) the existence of a present disability, (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of an injury or disease, 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). 

The Board is charged with the duty to assess the credibility and weight given to evidence.  Madden v. Gober, 125 F.3d 1477, 1481 (Fed. Cir. 1997), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1046 (1998); Wensch v. Principi, 15 Vet. App. 362, 367 (2001).  Indeed, in Jefferson v. Principi, 271 F.3d 1072 (Fed. Cir. 2001), the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit), citing its decision in Madden, recognized that that Board had inherent fact-finding ability.  Id. at 1076; see also 38 U.S.C. § 7104(a) (West 2002).  Moreover, the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) has declared that in adjudicating a claim, the Board has the responsibility to weigh and assess the evidence.  Bryan v. West, 13 Vet. App. 482, 488-89 (2000); Wilson v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 614, 618 (1992).
 (Fed. Cir. 2001), the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit), citing its decision in Madden, recognized that that Board had inherent fact-finding ability.  Id. at 1076; see also 38 U.S.C. § 7104(a) (West 2002).  Moreover, the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) has declared that in adjudicating a claim, the Board has the responsibility to weigh and assess the evidence.  Bryan v. West, 13 Vet. App. 482, 488-89 (2000); Wilson v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 614, 618 (1992). 

As a finder of fact, when considering whether lay evidence is satisfactory, the Board may also properly consider internal inconsistency of the statements, facial plausibility, consistency with other evidence submitted on behalf of the Veteran, and the Veteran's demeanor when testifying at a hearing.  See Dalton v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 23, 38 (2007); Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498, 511 (1995), aff'd per curiam, 78 F.3d 604 (Fed. Cir. 1996). 

When the evidence is in approximate balance in the Veteran's favor or nearly equal regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, the Secretary shall give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant.  38 U.S.C. § 5107; see also Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 53 (1990); Lynch v. McDonough, 21 F.4th 776 (Fed. Cir. 2021) (en banc). 

After a review of the evidence of record, the Board finds that service connection for a psychiatric disability, diagnosed as major depressive disorder, is warranted.  38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303; Shedden, 381 F.3d at 1166-67. 

First, the Board notes that, in the September 2022 rating decision, the RO favorably found that the Veteran has been diagnosed with bipolar disorder, type II, and that the claimed issue was treated in service.  The Board is bound by these findings.  38 C.F.R. § 3.104(c). 

In the July 2012 VA examination, the VA examiner diagnosed the Veteran as having bipolar disorder, type II, and personality disorder.  The examiner opined that the Veteran's psychiatric disability was less likely than not incurred in or caused by in-service injury, event, or illness.  The examiner reasoned that the Veteran's mental health conditions pre-existed service, noting that the Veteran described a history of mental health problems. 

The Board notes that, despite the RO's findings in the September 2022 rating decision and the VA examiner's opinion, the Veteran does not have a pre-existing disability.  While the Veteran was treated for a psychiatric disability in September 2005, shortly after enlistment, the Veteran was found to be normal upon examination.  Thus, the Board finds that the evidence is not sufficient to rebut the presumption of soundness and further finds that the Veteran is presumed to have been sound upon entrance to service.  38 U.S.C. § 1111; 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(b)(1). 

The Board finds that the consistent lay statements constitute competent and credible evidence that the Veteran's psychiatric disability began only in service and have since continued to the present and finds the Veteran's statements to be the most probative evidence of record.  See Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2007); Barr, 21 Vet. App. at 310; 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (a)(2).  The Veteran has consistently reported that his psychiatric disability first began in service, and the Board finds that he is competent and credible to report having psychiatric symptomatology and accompanying symptoms. 

Thus, because the Veteran was normal at service entrance with respect to this disability, and since the evidence does not clearly and unmistakably show that his bipolar disorder both existed prior to service and was not aggravated by service, (and he currently suffers from bipolar disorder), the criteria for service connection have been met. 

In light of the foregoing and resolving all doubt in the Veteran's favor, service connection for a psychiatric disability is granted.  38 U.S.C. § 5107(b), Lynch, 21 F.4th 776. 

 

 

STEVEN D. REISS

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans
, and the Board finds that he is competent and credible to report having psychiatric symptomatology and accompanying symptoms. 

Thus, because the Veteran was normal at service entrance with respect to this disability, and since the evidence does not clearly and unmistakably show that his bipolar disorder both existed prior to service and was not aggravated by service, (and he currently suffers from bipolar disorder), the criteria for service connection have been met. 

In light of the foregoing and resolving all doubt in the Veteran's favor, service connection for a psychiatric disability is granted.  38 U.S.C. § 5107(b), Lynch, 21 F.4th 776. 

 

 

STEVEN D. REISS

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	B. Mountjoy, 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.