Citation Nr: 18146084
Decision Date: 10/30/18	Archive Date: 10/30/18

DOCKET NO. 16-31 464
DATE:	October 30, 2018
ORDER
Entitlement to service connection for obstructive sleep apnea is granted.
FINDING OF FACT
The Veteran’s obstructive sleep apnea is caused by his service-connected posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
CONCLUSION OF LAW
The criteria for entitlement to service connection for obstructive sleep apnea have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b) (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304 (2017).
REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION
The Veteran served on active duty from June 1986 to July 1995. 
This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2015 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).
While the Veteran filed a notice of disagreement (NOD) for the issue of entitlement to service connection for vision loss, he did not appeal the issue after it was adjudicated in a May 2016 statement of the case (SOC). See June 2016 substantive appeal. Thus, the issue is not before the Board.
Entitlement to service connection for obstructive sleep apnea.
The Veteran is diagnosed with obstructive sleep apnea. See, e.g., December 2014 sleep apnea VA examination. Three VA examiners opined that the Veteran’s sleep apnea is not related to his service-connected PTSD because sleep apnea is not related to PTSD. See December 2014 VA PTSD examination; December 2014 sleep apnea VA examination; April 2016 VA sleep apnea examination. However, those opinions do not discuss the numerous medical studies submitted by the Veteran that discuss a relationship between PTSD and sleep apnea, see November 2014 correspondence, and thus are given little to no probative weight. A private opinion by Dr. B. Valette, PhD, clinical psychologist, opined it was at least as likely as not that the Veteran’s PTSD caused his sleep apnea because of the medical studies linking the two disabilities. He also referenced other Board decisions discussing other physicians’ assessments linking the two disabilities. See June 2016 private opinion. Thus, the evidence is at least in equipoise and resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor the Board finds that service connection is warranted.
 
E. I. VELEZ
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	J. Sandler, Associate Counsel