Citation Nr: 21069656 Decision Date: 11/19/21 Archive Date: 11/19/21 DOCKET NO. 17-38 567 DATE: November 19, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is granted. FINDING OF FACT The probative evidence of record demonstrates that the Veteran has PTSD due to a service-related military sexual trauma. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for PTSD have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107(b) (2018); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304 (2021). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty with the United States Army from May 1992 to September 2000. In August 2021, the Veteran testified before the undersigned at a Board hearing. A transcript of that hearing is of record. Board decisions must be based on the entire record, with consideration of all the evidence. 38 U.S.C. § 7104. The law requires only that the Board address its reasons for rejecting evidence favorable to the veteran. Timberlake v. Gober, 14 Vet. App. 122 (2000). The Board must review the entire record, but does not have to discuss each piece of evidence. Gonzales v. West, 218 F.3d 1378 (Fed. Cir. 2000). 1. Entitlement to service connection for PTSD The Veteran claims entitlement to service connection for PTSD. Specifically, the Veteran contends her current PTSD is the result of a military sexual trauma during her period of active service In general, service connection will be granted for disability resulting from injury or disease incurred in or aggravated by active military service. 38 U.S.C. § 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Evidence of continuity of symptomatology from the time of service until the present is required where the chronicity of a condition manifested during service either has not been established or might reasonably be questioned. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b). Establishing service connection for PTSD requires: (1) medical evidence diagnosing posttraumatic stress disorder in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 4.125; (2) credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressor occurred; and (3) medical evidence of a link between current symptomatology and the claimed in-service stressor. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f). If a PTSD claim is based on in-service personal assault, evidence from sources other than the 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. VA will not deny a claim for PTSD that is based on in-service personal assault without first advising the claimant that evidence from sources other than the Veteran's service records or evidence of behavior changes may constitute credible supporting evidence of the stressor and allowing him or her the opportunity to furnish this type of evidence or advise VA of potential sources of such evidence. 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. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f)(5). In determining whether service connection is warranted for a disability, VA is responsible for determining whether the evidence supports the claim or is in relative equipoise, with the appellant prevailing in either event, or whether a preponderance of the evidence is against the claim, in which case the claim is denied. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. The Veteran's VA treatment records, dated February 13, 2019, establish a current diagnosis of PTSD. In August 2021, the Veteran testified under oath that she was the victim of military sexual trauma by fellow servicemembers while stationed at South Korea in 1996. In August 2014, the Veteran submitted a lay statement detailing the military sexual trauma that occurred in 1996 in South Korea. The Veteran submitted similar statements in July 2016 and June 2017. A February 2019 VA mental health note indicates the Veteran reported matching details and dates of a military sexual trauma to her VA psychiatrist. In light of the above discussed evidence, the Board finds that the Veteran has presented competent and credible evidence of a military sexual trauma during her period of active duty. The Veteran has also submitted medical evidence of a nexus between her military sexual trauma and her current PTSD. The February 2019 VA Mental Health Outpatient Treatment note states: [The Veteran] is a black female veteran with [history of] depression, PTSD [military sexual trauma] (MST), chronic pain (all over her body), struggling with past MST, and being worse in the last 18 months with long history of treatment in PCMH since 2009, recently referred to GMHC in 2015 for further treatment of past MST. The February 2019 VA Mental Health Outpatient Treatment note also reported that the Veteran suffers from intrusive thoughts related to the MST and those thoughts have impaired function causing depression, mood and trauma-related symptoms, and difficulty experiencing pleasurable emotions. The Board finds that the probative evidence of record establishes a current diagnosis of PTSD, a credible in-service military sexual trauma, and a nexus between the Veteran's current PTSD symptomology and her military sexual trauma. Accordingly, entitlement to service connection for PTSD due to military sexual trauma is warranted. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f). D. Martz Ames Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board B. Riordan, 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.