Citation Nr: 20025035 Decision Date: 04/10/20 Archive Date: 04/10/20 DOCKET NO. 18-14 636 DATE: April 10, 2020 ORDER Service connection for PTSD is granted. FINDING OF FACT Resolving any reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, the evidence establishes that the Veteran is currently diagnosed with PTSD that is related to in-service sexual assault corroborated by service treatment records. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for PTSD have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1111, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.304(f). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served honorably including active duty service from September 1982 to February 1984. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2014 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). Though the Veteran requested a hearing before the Board, the Board has determined that service connection is warranted based on the evidence currently of record and will accordingly grant that full relief now. The Veteran seeks service connection for PTSD stemming from in-service sexual assaults. To establish service connection for PTSD requires medical evidence diagnosing the disorder in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 4.125(a); a link, established by medical evidence, between the current symptoms and an in-service stressor; and credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressor occurred. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f). At the outset, the Board is mindful that Veterans claiming service connection for PTSD due to personal assault face unique problems documenting their claims. Since assault is an extremely personal and sensitive issue, many incidents of personal assault are not officially reported, and victims of this type of in-service trauma may find it difficult to produce evidence to support the occurrence of the stressor. See Proposed Rule, PTSD Based on Personal Assault, 65 Fed. Reg. 61132 (Oct. 16, 2000) (“Many incidents of in-service personal assault are not officially reported, and veterans may find it difficult to produce evidence to prove the occurrence of this type of stressor.”). Accordingly, the regulations governing PTSD provide that where a claim is based on an in-service personal assault, evidence from sources other than the Veteran’s service records may corroborate the Veteran’s account of the stressor incident. Examples of such evidence include, but are not limited to: records from law enforcement authorities, rape crisis centers, mental health counseling centers, hospitals, or physicians; pregnancy tests or tests for sexually transmitted diseases; and statements from family members, roommates, fellow service members, or clergy. Evidence of behavior changes following the claimed assault is one type of relevant evidence that may be found in these sources. Examples of behavior changes that may constitute credible evidence of the stressor include but are not limited to: a request for a transfer to another military duty assignment; deterioration in work performance; substance abuse; episodes of depression, panic attacks, or anxiety without an identifiable cause; or unexplained economic or social behavior changes. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f)(5). Upon review of all the evidence, and resolving any reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, the Board finds that service connection is established. The record reflects the Veteran has been diagnosed with posttraumatic stress disorder. The Veteran has submitted that she was raped by other servicemembers during the course of her service, including incidents in 1983 while serving at an amphibious base. A VA medical examiner in January 2018 opined that this stressor was sufficient to support her diagnosis of PTSD. The evidence therefore establishes that the Veteran has a current disability of PTSD linked to the in-service sexual assault. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f). Military personnel records reflect that the Veteran served at that amphibious base from March 1983 until discharge in February 1984. Service treatment records beginning in June 1983 show that the Veteran had positive tests for pregnancy and for a venereal disease during this time. The January 2018 VA examiner found that the test for a venereal disease was not a sufficient marker of sexual assault, stating that the Veteran reported having issues with the condition during bootcamp in 1982. The record reflects, however, that the Veteran was slandered by another servicemember who said an allergic rash was a venereal disease; indeed, the service treatment records from the date of bootcamp show that the Veteran was seen for a rash, with no mention of a venereal disease at that time. The Veteran wrote in her March 2018 substantive appeal that there may have been a misunderstanding with the January 2018 VA examiner about the details of the venereal disease, as the Veteran was uncomfortable with the examiner and the way in which the examiner was questioning her. The Board accordingly finds the January 2018 VA examiner’s interpretation of this marker of less probative value, and instead finds, resolving any reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, that the evidence of the in-service pregnancy testing and venereal disease testing during 1983 corroborates the Veteran’s account of the in-service sexual assault. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.304(f)(5); see Jandreau, 492 at 1376. Given the evidence that the Veteran has PTSD due to in-service sexual assault that is corroborated by markers in the service treatment records, the Board grants service connection for PTSD. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1111, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.304(f). K. Parakkal Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Davis, 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.