Citation Nr: 21001923 Decision Date: 01/12/21 Archive Date: 01/12/21 DOCKET NO. 15-02 897 DATE: January 12, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is granted. FINDING OF FACT Resolving all doubt in the Veteran’s favor, his PTSD is causally related to in-service personal assault. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for PTSD have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 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 February 1970 to February 1972. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2012 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran appeared at a Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge on July 2018. A transcript of the hearing is in the Veteran’s file. This matter was previously before the Board in October 2018, at which time it was remanded for additional evidence to confirm the Veteran’s stressor. The Veteran also should have been provided with a personal assault stressor notice letter, which does not appear to have been completed. However, as the Board herein grants the service connection for PTSD, there is no prejudice to the Veteran in proceeding with a decision at this time. Entitlement to service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) The Veteran contends his PTSD is related to an in-service stressor involving a personal assault, specifically, when he was attacked by a fellow servicemember with a knife. Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by service or when evidence establishes a disease diagnosed after discharge was incurred in service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Direct service connection may not be granted without evidence of a current disability; in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the present disease or injury. Id.; see also Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498, 506 (1995) aff'd, 78 F.3d 604 (Fed. Cir. 1996). For PTSD, service connection 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. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (f). Personal assault is an event of human design that threatens or inflicts harm. Examples of this are rape, physical assault, domestic battering, robbery, mugging, and stalking. Patton v. West, 12 Vet. App. 272, 277 (1999). If a PTSD claim is based on personal assault in service, evidence from sources other than the veteran's 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. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (f)(5). 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. Id. The Board is cognizant that medical opinions in cases of personal assault for PTSD are exceptions to the general rule discussed in Moreau v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 389 (1996), that an opinion by a medical professional based on a post-service examination cannot be used to establish the occurrence of a stressor. See Menegassi v. Shinseki, 683 F.3d 1379, 1382 (Fed. Cir. 2011); Patton, supra; see also 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (f)(3). When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence 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; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; see also Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 53 (1990). The Veteran asserts that he has PTSD as the result of in-service personal assault. He details a fellow service member assaulting him, and reports that he experienced PTSD symptoms related to that assault since service. VA treatment records document a diagnosis of PTSD during the pendency of the appeal, and as such, the evidence demonstrates a current disability for service connection purposes. Service treatment records do not reflect complaints, treatment, or a diagnosis referable to PTSD or any other acquired psychiatric disorder, and service personnel records do not reflect any behavioral changes during service. The RO requested the Veteran's unit history and other pertinent records from the Joint Services Records Research Center (JSRRC) and the National Archives pertaining to an incident. A Command Chronology report for the period of July 1971 to December 1971 was provided by the United States Marine Corps, but there was no detailed report of any injury. However, the Veteran’s friends provided lay statements attesting to the Veteran's behavioral changes following service as well as the increase in severity of his symptoms over time. One friend stated that he has known the Veteran for over 40 years and has the heard the same story of the marine who attacked him with a knife many times. Another friend stated he knew the Veteran prior to enlistment as a fun loving, fine young man, but after service, he was mad at the world, fighting and drinking. The Veteran also testified that he was self-medicating, in part, as a coping mechanism for his PTSD symptoms. Further, VA providers opined the Veteran's PTSD is related to military service. In October 2010, a VA clinical social worker found the Veteran did experience a traumatic event during the attack while he was sleeping and reexperiences the trauma with flashbacks, nightmares and intrusive memories. In a June 2019 VA examination, a psychologist opined that the Veteran’s PTSD is at least as likely as not related to being assaulted by a fellow marine where he had to fight for his life. She also noted that when the Veteran experiences any sensory information similar to what was going on around him at the time of the assault, that triggers his anxiety and panic attacks, and thus his PTSD is as likely as not related to his claimed stressor. VA mental health treatment records from May 2020 note that the Veteran presented with trauma related symptoms associated an event in the military when someone tried to stab him in his sleep. (Continued on the next page)   Based on the current diagnosis of PTSD, supporting evidence of behavioral changes following the described stressors, and the positive nexus opinion, the Board resolves all doubt in the Veteran's favor and finds his PTSD, is causally related to in-service personal assault. As such, service connection for such disorder is warranted. MICHAEL E. KILCOYNE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board B. Jaigirdar, 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.