Citation Nr: 21061296 Decision Date: 10/01/21 Archive Date: 10/01/21 DOCKET NO. 17-57 982 DATE: October 1, 2021 ORDER Service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is granted. FINDING OF FACT The evidence is at least in equipoise as to whether the Veteran has PTSD as the result of her military service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for PTSD have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 5103, 5103A, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.159, 3.102, 3.303, 3.304. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from July 1981 to December 1981. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2017 rating decision of the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ). The Veteran participated in a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in July 2021, and a transcript of this hearing has been associated with the record. Service Connection The Veteran contends that she has an acquired psychiatric disability, to include PTSD, as the result of military sexual trauma (MST), including sexual harassment and assault. Service connection for PTSD requires: (1) medical evidence diagnosing the condition in accordance with VA regulations; (2) credible supporting evidence that the claimed in service stressor occurred; and (3) a link, established by medical evidence, between current symptoms and an in service stressor. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f). When, as in this case, a PTSD claim is based on an in-service personal assault, including MST, the evidence from sources other than the veteran's service records may corroborate the veteran's account of the stressor incident. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f)(5). Examples of such evidence may include records from law enforcement authorities, rape crisis centers, mental health counseling centers, hospitals, or physicians; tests for sexually transmitted diseases; and statements from family members, roommates, fellow service members, or clergy. Behavior changes following the claimed assault may constitute credible evidence of the in-service stressor. Examples of such behavioral changes include requests for transfers to another military duty assignments; deterioration in work performance; substance abuse; episodes of depression, panic attacks, or anxiety without an identifiable cause; or unexplained economic or social behavior changes. In addition, VA may submit any evidence that it receives to an appropriate medical or mental health professional for an opinion as to whether it indicates that a personal assault occurred. Turning to the facts in this case, the Veteran has claimed, for example during her July 2021 hearing before the undersigned, that her male superiors sexually harassed and otherwise threatened her during basic training in Fort Gordon, Georgia. The Veteran stated that a superior physically pushed her down on top of a desk in an attempt to force her to sign paperwork relating to the training discharge program. The Veteran stated that she was transferred to Fort Lee, Virginia following this assault. The Veteran's personnel records show that she indeed transferred from Fort Gordon, Georgia, to Fort Lee, Virginia, in November 1981. In November 2020, a friend of the Veteran's stated that the Veteran was "a different person" when she separated from service as the result of the "negative, hurtful, [and] abusive" treatment that she experienced during service. In January 2021, another friend of the Veteran's stated that the Veteran had described experiencing sexual harassment during service, and she was "reserved, isolated even, not outgoing anymore" following her separation from service. In a VA treatment record dated January 2021, a licensed clinical psychologist noted the Veteran's accounts of experiencing long-standing intrusive thoughts of the sexual harassment and threatening behavior that she experienced during service. The clinician noted that the Veteran's friends and family had corroborated the Veteran's in-service harassment and trauma. The clinician diagnosed the Veteran with PTSD as the result of the sexual harassment and threatening behavior that she experienced during her active duty service. Turning to a review of this evidence, the Veteran has been diagnosed with PTSD. While the Veteran's service records do not document the claimed in-service assault or harassment, the Board notes that the January 2021 clinician essentially found that the weight of the evidence, including the lay corroboration of the Veteran's account from family and friends, supported the occurrence of the Veteran's claimed in-service stressor incidents. The Board places great probative weight on this clinician's finding, and it concludes that the weight of the evidence contains credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service harassment and assault indeed occurred. The January 2021 clinician otherwise linked the Veteran's PTSD to her in-service experiences. With a current disability, an in-service stressor, and a link between such stressor and the Veteran's service, service connection for PTSD is granted. In making this determination, the Board acknowledges that a March 2017 examiner found the Veteran not to have a diagnosed psychiatric disability, to include PTSD. The Board places little probative weight in this opinion, however, because as noted above, the Veteran has indeed received mental health treatment and mental health diagnoses, including a diagnosis with PTSD, since filing her appeal. MICHAEL A. HERMAN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board J.A. Flynn, 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.