Citation Nr: 21041581 Decision Date: 07/09/21 Archive Date: 07/09/21 DOCKET NO. 16-01 528 DATE: July 9, 2021 ORDER Service connection for sleep apnea is denied. FINDING OF FACT The evidence fails to establish that the Veteran's sleep apnea is connected to service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for sleep apnea have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from September 1983 to July 1997, followed by service in the Army National Guard. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2013 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In January 2021, the Board remanded the claim for an addendum etiology opinion that considers the Veteran's statements. The Veteran seeks service connection for sleep apnea. Service connection may be established for disability resulting from personal injury suffered or disease contracted in the line of duty in the active military, naval, or air service. 38 U.S.C. § 1131; 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 event, injury, or disease and the present injury or disease. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Active military, naval, or air service during a period of war includes active duty, a period of active duty for training during which an individual was disabled from an injury or diseases incurred in the line of duty, or a period of inactive duty for training during which an individual was disabled from an injury incurred in the line of duty. 38 U.S.C. § 101(24). After review of all the evidence of record, the Board finds that service connection has not been established. The Veteran testified at a March 2017 Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge that during service he always felt tired, that other servicemembers complained that he snored loudly and was restless, and that his tiredness problem continued ever since service. He stated he was first diagnosed with sleep apnea in 2014 and was issued a CPAP in 2015. In connection with the Veteran's claim, he was provided a VA medical examination in October 2019, as well as a February 2021 VA addendum opinion following the Board's prior decision. After reviewing all the evidence in the Veteran's file, and expressly considering the Veteran's own statements that he felt tired in service and was told by others that he snored, the February 2021 clinician stated that a report of these symptoms alone was insufficient to support a diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea during that time. Moreover, the clinician noted that during service the Veteran answered "No" to whether he at that time or before had frequent trouble sleeping on reports of medical history from September 1986, June 1989, December 1993, April 1997, as well as findings that the Veteran was in normal health in September 1986, December 1993, April 1997, and at his July 1997 separation examination. As this is the only adequate opinion of record regarding a connection to service, the preponderance of the evidence thus fails to establish that the Veteran's sleep apnea is related to his service. The Board acknowledges the Veteran's contention that his condition may be related to service, but the evidence does not reflect that the Veteran has education, training, or experience to opine on the etiology of sleep apnea, which is a medically complex issue beyond observation by the senses. Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 470 (1994). Without sufficient evidence that the Veteran's sleep apnea is connected to service, the claim for service connection for sleep apnea must be denied. 38 U.S.C. § 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. K. Parakkal Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Davis, 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.