Citation Nr: 21025366 Decision Date: 04/28/21 Archive Date: 04/28/21 DOCKET NO. 15-16 362 DATE: April 28, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), is granted. FINDING OF FACT Resolving all doubt in the Veteran’s favor, his diagnosed PTSD is causally related to an in-service personal assault. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for PTSD are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304 REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from January 1978 to January 1982. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2012 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Board remanded this matter in February 2019 for additional development. The matter is now returned to the Board for further appellate review. Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder The Veteran contends that he developed PTSD as a result of a personal assault that occurred during active duty service. The Board concludes that the Veteran has a current diagnosis of PTSD that began during active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1363, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (a). The claim is granted. Service connection will be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Establishing service connection generally requires evidence of (1) a current disability; (2) an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the current disability. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). For PTSD, service connection requires medical evidence diagnosing the condition in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 4.125 (a), a link, established by medical evidence between current symptoms and an in-service stressor, and credible supporting evidence that the claimed in-service stressor occurred. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (f). If a PTSD claim is based on personal assault in service, evidence from sources other than the veteran’s records may corroborate an 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. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (f)(5). 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. Id. The provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 4.125 (a) require that a diagnosis of a mental disorder conform to the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fifth Edition (DSM-5). Although the Veteran was originally diagnosed with PTSD in 2009, under the criteria set forth in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual 4th Edition (DSM-4), the January 2020 VA examiner diagnosed the Veteran with PTSD under the criteria set forth in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual 5th Edition (DSM-5). The Veteran asserts his PTSD is the result of multiple incidents involving hazing that occurred while he was assigned to the USS Samuel Gompers. He reported a fellow sailor was purposely hit with a hatch door; another sailor was hung upside down and other sailors threatened to pour acid on him; and a fellow sailor attacked him with a knife while he was sleeping in the bunkroom. The Veteran indicated he did not report the incidents because he feared the sailors would retaliate against him, he slept in a bunk next to the sailor that attacked him, and he had very little time to serve and just wanted to be done. In October 2012, the Veteran underwent a VA examination where he reported the incidents involving the hatch door and witnessing fellow sailors hanging another sailor upside down. The examiner diagnosed the Veteran with PTSD and opined that the Veteran’s PTSD was at least as likely as not incurred in or caused by the reported in-service stressors. The Veteran indicated these events caused him severe stress, recurring symptoms, and prompted him to seek both group and individual counseling for behavior problems related to PTSD. The Veteran reported being married three times, with the first two ending because of his “unpredictability and anger.” He reported reliving the traumatic events, experiencing distressing dreams, and experiencing recurrent and distressing memories. He reported difficulty sleeping, irritability and angry outbursts, hypervigilance, and exaggerated startle response. He reported unshared sensory perceptions and hearing “chattering.” Moreover, he reported being argumentative when he does not wish to be. He reported alcohol abuse during service and self-medicating since. The VA examiner concluded it was at least as likely as not that the signs, events or circumstances during and after the Veteran’s service were associated with the occurrence of his reported in-service stressors. He stated it was at least as likely as not that his current PTSD symptoms were related to these in-service stressors. The examiner further stated that the in-service events, as described by the Veteran were extraordinary and would be expected to have a significant emotional impact on any person with reasonable intellect and personal sensitivity. In January 2020, the Veteran underwent a second VA examination where he reported the incidents involving the hatch door and the attack by a fellow sailor with a knife. The examiner diagnosed the Veteran with PTSD but opined that his PTSD was less likely than not incurred in or caused by the claimed in-service stressors. The examiner explained that the Veteran’s service records did not contain documentation of an assault and that the noted in-service injuries were not supportive of the Veteran’s reports of PTSD. The Board assigns the January 2020 VA opinion no probative value because the Veteran’s August 1981 service treatment records (STRs) do contain a notation of the Veteran seeking medical treatment for an assault. Moreover, the Board notes that statements reporting an in-service personal assault may be corroborated based on sources other than service records. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f)(5). Despite the lack of information in the Veteran’s STRs to corroborate PTSD due to physical assault, the Veteran has submitted numerous statements, to include statements contained in medical examinations, regarding the nature of his stressors and the resulting behavioral effects. Moreover, statements from his spouse also describe the resulting behavioral and psychological symptoms she witnessed during their marriage. Specifically, she reported the Veteran experienced more severe symptoms when he discussed the event in the bunk room. Moreover, the Veteran has consistently reported the same three incidents to medical providers. Further, numerous VA treatment records note the Veteran has “severe PTSD.” He also reported hypervigilance, irritability, emotional numbing, insomnia, and nightmares, which began after the incident in the bunk room. Both the October 2012 and January 2020 VA examinations suggest the Veteran’s pre-military history was unremarkable. Based on the totality of the evidence, the Board considers these statements to be both competent (as the Veteran is competent to report what he has experienced first-hand, such as being attacked with a knife) and credible (as the Veteran has consistently reported the same in-service events) supporting evidence of the in-service stressors. See Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 469 (1994). Specifically, his consistent reports are generally supported by his service personnel records, including a notation that he sought treatment for an assault in August 1981 while onboard the USS Samuel Gompers; his wife’s testimony concerning his symptoms; and there is no evidence contradicting his accounts of these events. Upon review of the record, the Board finds the evidence to at least be in equipoise as to whether the Veteran’s current PTSD is related to service. Accordingly, after resolving all doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Board finds that service connection for PTSD is warranted. J. Komperda Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Zachery S.C. Luce, 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.