Citation Nr: 21021821 Decision Date: 04/14/21 Archive Date: 04/14/21 DOCKET NO. 17-27 251 DATE: April 14, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for sleep apnea is denied. FINDING OF FACT The preponderance of the evidence is against finding that sleep apnea began during active service, or is otherwise related to an in-service injury or disease. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for sleep apnea are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active military service from March 1986 to March 1992. This matter is on appeal from a June 2015 rating decision, and was previously remanded by the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) in November 2018. As noted by the Board previously, the Veteran revoked Disabled American Veterans as his power of attorney in October 2017, and has not appointed a new representative. The Board considers him self-represented in this appeal. The Veteran contends that his sleep apnea began during service. February 2014 claim. Service connection may be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. The three-element test for service connection requires evidence of: (1) a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the current disability and the in-service disease or injury. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166 -67 (Fed. Cir. 2004). The question for the Board is whether the Veteran has a current disability that began during service or is at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. The Board concludes that, while the Veteran has a current diagnosis of sleep apnea, and evidence shows that he reported frequent trouble sleeping during service, the preponderance of the evidence weighs against finding that the Veteran’s diagnosis of sleep apnea began during service or is otherwise related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. While a March 1992 separation report of medical history shows that the Veteran answered yes to frequent trouble sleeping, private treatment records show the Veteran was not diagnosed with sleep apnea until February 2015, decades after his separation from service. While the Veteran is competent to report having experienced symptoms of trouble sleeping since service, he does not have the training or credentials to provide a diagnosis in this case or determine that these symptoms were manifestations of sleep apnea. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377, 1377 n.4 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Further, the November 2019 VA examiner opined that the Veteran’s sleep apnea is not at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, including trouble sleeping during service. The rationale was that all records were reviewed, which did not support service connection. The examiner noted that other than the Veteran reporting to having challenges with being chronically sleepy since service, they did not find medical records to support sleep apnea associated with his service time. The examiner opined that difficulty sleeping alone would not be an indication of sleep apnea. Therefore, the diagnosed obstructive sleep apnea was less likely than not incurred in or caused by the claimed in-service injury, event, or illness. The examiner’s opinion is probative, because it is based on an accurate medical history and consideration of the Veteran’s lay statements, and provides an explanation that contains clear conclusions and supporting data. Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295, 304 (2008). The Veteran believes his sleep apnea is related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. The Veteran in this case is not competent to provide a nexus opinion regarding this issue because the record does not show that he has the medical training or credentials to make such a determination. Jandreau, 492 F.3d at 1377 n.4; see also Kahana v. Shinseki, 24. Vet. App. 428 (2011). Consequently, the Board gives more probative weight to the VA examiner’s opinion in denying this claim. Z. SAHRAIE Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board L. Barstow, 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.