Citation Nr: 21062958 Decision Date: 10/12/21 Archive Date: 10/12/21 DOCKET NO. 17-46 506 DATE: October 12, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for a nightmare disorder is granted. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran's nightmare disorder is at least as likely as not related to incidents that occurred while the Veteran was in the military. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to service connection for a nightmare disorder have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 4.125. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty with the Army from July 1973 to November 1975. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2015 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge at a Travel Board hearing in March 2020. A transcript of the proceeding has been associated with the claims file. The Veteran's claim was remanded by the Board in a May 2020 decision. The Board directed the RO to obtain VA treatment and private treatment records, schedule the Veteran for a VA examination, and then readjudicate the appeal. The Board finds that the RO did not substantially comply with the March 2020 remand as the RO failed to readjudicate the case and issue a supplemental statement of the case after receiving new and pertinent evidence, including VA treatment records and a VA examination. See 38 C.F.R. § 19.31; see also Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). Nevertheless, the Board finds that a remand is unnecessary and may proceed with the adjudication of the claims herein without any prejudice to the Veteran given the favorable findings below. See Bernard v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 384, 394 (1993). The Board also notes that in the August 2021 appellate brief, the Veteran's representative requested that the Board reconsider the Veteran's claims of service connection for urethritis/gonorrhea and epididymitis. However, these claims were deemed to be withdrawn in the May 2020 Board decision. Thus, they will not be addressed in this decision. Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include nightmare disorder The Veteran contends that he has a current mental health diagnosis that is related to his military service. Generally, service connection may be established if the evidence demonstrates that a current disability resulted from a disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active duty service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. To that end, service connection may be established for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence, including that pertinent to the period of service, establishes the disease was incurred during active duty service. 38 C.F.R § 3.303 (d). In order to prove service connection, there must be competent and credible evidence of (1) a current disability; (2) an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a nexus or link between the current disability and the in service disease or injury. See Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). As an initial matter, the Board finds that the Veteran is currently diagnosed with a nightmare disorder that meets the DSM-5 criteria, as determined by the August 2020 VA examiner and an October 2018 Psychiatry Consult included in the Veteran's VA treatment records. Therefore, the first requirement for service connection is met. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 4.125; see also Shedden, 381 F.3d at 1167. As for the second requirement for service connection, an in-service incurrence, the Veteran specifically contends that he started experiencing depression after he was sent to a drug rehabilitation program in the service. See March 2020 Hearing Transcript. The Veteran testified that he was prescribed pain pills by a dentist and then tested positive for drugs. He further testified that he was placed in a drug abuse program although he was not a drug user. The Veteran's service treatment records and military personnel records indicate that the Veteran first entered an Alcohol and Drug Abuse Control Program, by direction of his command, in May 1975 for methaqualone use. He was discharged from the program in November 1975. A June 1975 service treatment note stated that the Veteran was referred from the counseling center subsequent to a second positive drug test for methaqualone. The note further indicated that an interview showed positive drug use. In September 1975, a Board Enlistment/ Reenlistment decision noted that the Veteran was not recommended for retention as he had a "positive urinalysis" and was a "confirmed drug user." The Veteran's service treatment records also include a March 1975 dental examination which notes that the Veteran had a tooth that had "been hurting for a few days," and his prognosis was noted as "poor." Based on the information contained in the Veteran's service treatment records and military personnel records, the Board finds that the Veteran's March 2020 testimony regarding the onset of his depression symptoms is credible and highly probative. See Kahana v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 428, 433 (2011). Thus, the Board concludes that the Veteran meets the second requirement of service connection. The remaining question is whether the Veteran's diagnosed nightmare disorder is at least as likely as not related to his in-service contentions regarding being accused as a drug user after being directed to complete a drug program. In August 2020, the VA examiner opined that the Veteran's nightmare disorder is at least as likely as not related to an incident in which he was given a pain prescription by the dentist during his military service. The rationale provided is that the Veteran had no mental health history prior to the military. Additionally, the examiner found that the Veteran had been having symptoms of a nightmare disorder for quite some time and his VA treatment records show a consistent diagnosis since at least 2015. The Board finds this opinion to be adequate and probative as it is based on accurate medical history and provides an explanation. See Nieves- Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295 (2008). The Board concludes that the preponderance of the evidence supports a finding that the Veteran's nightmare disorder is at least as likely as not related to symptoms resulting from his May 1975 admission for drug treatment after taking pain pills prescribed by a dentist. Accordingly, entitlement to service connection for nightmare disorder is granted. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. L. M. BARNARD Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Hartford, 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.