Citation Nr: 21064188 Decision Date: 10/19/21 Archive Date: 10/19/21 DOCKET NO. 17-42 172 DATE: October 19, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). is granted. FINDING OF FACT It is at least as likely as not the Veteran's PTSD is related to an incident in service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for PTSD have been met. U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Navy from May 1972 to February 1973. Entitlement to service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The Veteran contends that his PTSD is related to an incident in service, the Board finds that the evidence supports the Veteran's contention and service connection for PTSD is warranted. Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from a disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131 ; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (a). To establish entitlement to service-connected compensation benefits, 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)). The Board finds that the Veteran has a current diagnosis of PTSD as noted in his February 2016 VA treatment, and provided in a July 2016 correspondence from the Veteran's treating VA psychiatrist. 38 C.F.R. § 4.125(a). The Board is aware of a May 2017 VA examination which did not include a diagnosis of PTSD. However, the examiner did not foreclose the possibility that the Veteran had a PTSD diagnosis as he noted, "claimant is not being provided with a diagnosis of PTSD at this time." Moreover, the Board notes that the Veteran had one encounter with the VA examiner as compared to the several years of psychiatric treatment he was provided under his VA treating psychiatrist. Considering these facts, the Board finds that the Veteran has a current diagnosis of PTSD. Moving on to second element, a corroborated in-service stressor; here, the Board finds the Veteran's report of an in-service assault probative. The Veteran asserts that he was assaulted during his active service and provided details about a specific ship and time. The service records support that there were behavioral changes at this exact time and on the ship identified by the Veteran. These behavioral changes included a transfer off ship and unauthorized absence. Additionally, the Board finds the August 2016 correspondence from the Veteran's cousin particularly telling. In this correspondence, the Veteran's cousin details exhaustively the Veteran's change in behavior upon returning from an abbreviated term of service. Considering the foregoing, the Board finds the report of in-service assault credible, corroborated, and verified. Turning to the last element, a nexus, a private medical opinion provided in July 2016 includes the opinion that the Veteran's PTSD was due to his military assault. In the examination report, the examiner noted the Veteran's reports of an assault in service and cited specific instance, listed above, and provided a detailed rationale. The Board therefore finds this rationale sufficient to establish a nexus for the PTSD as related to the in-service assault. See Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295, 304 (2008). Accordingly, entitlement to service connection for PTSD is granted. GAYLE STROMMEN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Acosta, 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.