Citation Nr: 18147785 Decision Date: 11/06/18 Archive Date: 11/06/18 DOCKET NO. 16-36 264 DATE: November 6, 2018 ORDER Service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is granted. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran has PTSD and it is related to combat service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for PTSD have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1154, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from, October 2007 to November 2008 and from March 2011 to May 2012. He also had a period of active duty for training (ACDUTRA) from July 2006 to October 2006. The case is on appeal from a May 2014 rating decision. Service connection for PTSD. Legal Criteria Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from a disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. See 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. “To establish a right to compensation for a present disability, a veteran 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”—the so-called “nexus” requirement.” Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1362, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (quoting Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004)). 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f) concerns service connection for PTSD. It states that service connection for PTSD requires (1) medical evidence diagnosing the condition in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 4.125(a), (2) a link established by medical evidence between current symptoms and an in-service stressor, and (3) credible supporting evidence that the in-service stressor occurred. With regard to combat, 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f)(2) states that if a 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 that the claimed stressor is consistent with the circumstances, conditions, or hardships of the Veteran’s service, the Veteran’s lay testimony alone may establish occurrence of the claimed in-service stressor. See also 38 U.S.C. § 1154(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(d). Analysis The Veteran is claiming service connection for PTSD, which he relates to being in firefights and injured by improvised explosive devices (IEDs) during service. Notably, the Veteran is service connected for traumatic brain injury (TBI) and residuals therefrom. Given that the Veteran is a recipient of the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB), he participated in firefights and other combat situations during service. As his service-connected TBI disabilities demonstrate, he was injured during one of these. As a result, PTSD due to combat experiences is consistent with the circumstances, conditions, and hardships of his service. Consistent with 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f)(2), his lay statements serve to verify the stressor. See also 38 U.S.C. § 1154(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(d). There is some question as to whether the Veteran has PTSD. Private treatment records reveal that the Veteran has been diagnosed with PTSD, including a March 2015 evaluation. The Veteran submitted a July 2017 disability benefit questionnaire (DBQ) completed by his private physician. The DBQ shows that the Veteran has symptoms both from his TBI and PTSD. PTSD symptoms include anger, hypervigilance, and sleep disturbance. TBI-related symptoms include severe memory loss. A May 2014 VA examination diagnosed a cognitive disorder but not PTSD. When resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, the Board finds that the Veteran has PTSD. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. As the PTSD is related to in-service combat stressors, all three elements of the claim are met. As a result, service connection for PTSD is warranted. RYAN T. KESSEL Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD J. George