Citation Nr: 18141398 Decision Date: 10/10/18 Archive Date: 10/10/18 DOCKET NO. 16-29 715 DATE: October 10, 2018 ORDER The petition to reopen the previously denied claim of entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder is granted. Service connection for post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is granted subject to the laws and regulations governing monetary awards. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. An unappealed May 2011 rating decision denied service connection for psychiatric disorder; new and material evidence was not received prior to expiration of the appeal period; subsequently received evidence includes evidence that is not cumulative or redundant and relates to an unestablished fact necessary to reopen the claim. 2. The Veteran’s PTSD is related to in-service military sexual trauma (MST). CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The May 2011 rating decision denying the claim of entitlement to service connection for psychiatric disorder is final; and new and material evidence has been received to reopen the claim. 38 U.S.C. §§ 5103, 5103A, 5108, 7105(c); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.156(a), (c), 20.1103. 2. The criteria for service connection for PTSD are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1111, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(a), (f)(5). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 1. Whether new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the claim of entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder claimed as PTSD. An unappealed May 2011 rating decision denied service connection for psychiatric disorder. A May 2011 VA letter notified the Veteran of this decision and how to appeal. VA received no appeal and new and material evidence was not received prior to expiration of the appeal period. Therefore, that decision became final. However, subsequently received evidence includes relevant previously unassociated military personnel records and service treatment records. Therefore, the Board finds that the criteria for reopening are met. See 38 U.S.C. §§ 5103, 5103A, 5108, 7105(c); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.156(a), (c), 20.1103. 2. Entitlement to service connection for PTSD is granted. Service connection for PTSD requires medical evidence diagnosing the condition in accordance with 38 C.F.R. 4.125(a); a link, established by medical evidence, between current symptoms and an in-service stressor; and credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressor occurred. “Credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressor actually occurred” means that there is a legal standard that must be met and that the veteran’s report of the incident must be supported by service or civilian documentation of the incident, or if that is not available, there must be other evidence that would lead to the reasonable conclusion that the incident occurred. Such other evidence would generally include military or civilian documentation of behavioral changes after the incident which could reasonably be expected from a person who had undergone a personal assault. Such changes include, but are not limited to: sudden requests for other duty assignments without justification, obsessive behavior (such as over, or under, eating), increased disrespect for military or civilian authority etc. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(f)((5). The Veteran contends that she has PTSD related to in-service MST described in detail by her written statements to VA. These statements are associated with the record. The Board concludes that the Veteran has a current diagnosis of PTSD related to in-service injury, specifically the MST described by her. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1363, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a), (f)(5). A May 2014 VA examination reflects a diagnosis for PTSD due to MST. The examiner opined that PTSD was at least as likely as not caused by her claimed in-service MST. The examiner’s opinion is probative as it was prepared by a skilled, neutral medical professional after examination of the Veteran and review of the claims file, including the lay evidence supporting her history of MST in service. Furthermore, the diagnosis appears to be in accordance with 4.125(a). Additionally, the record includes several lay statements from persons that knew the Veteran at the time of the alleged in-service MST. This evidence is competent and credible. Moreover, it corroborates in-service MST as reported by the Veteran. Notably, two of the incidents reported by the Veteran were witnessed to some extent by two individuals who provided her with buddy statements. Hence, the Board finds that there is credible supporting evidence that would lead to the reasonable conclusion that the incidents described by the Veteran had occurred. Lastly, the Board observes the following: First, there is no negative medical opinion to weigh in this matter. Second, the May 2014 VA medical opinion expressly found the stressor incidents described by the Veteran were adequate to support the diagnosis of PTSD. Third, the originating agency when concluding that there was not credible supporting evidence of the claimed stressors did not consider the buddy statements submitted by the Veteran—note that the Statement of the Case does not list this evidence as having been considered. On balance, the weight of the evidence supports the claim. Accordingly, service connection for PTSD is granted. C.A. SKOW Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD K.M. Walker, Associate Counsel