Citation Nr: 18140062 Decision Date: 10/02/18 Archive Date: 10/02/18 DOCKET NO. 15-13 835 DATE: October 2, 2018 ORDER As new and material evidence sufficient to reopen the previously denied claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder to include post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depressive disorder has been received, the application to reopen is granted. REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder to include PTSD and depressive disorder is remanded. FINDING OF FACT 1. In an unappealed March 2003 decision, the RO denied the Veteran’s claim of entitlement to service connection for PTSD. 2. Evidence received since the March 2003 rating decision is not duplicative of evidence previously submitted and considered on the merits, and the evidence, by itself or when considered with previous evidence of record, relates to unestablished facts necessary to substantiate the claim of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder. CONCLUSION OF LAW 1. The March 2003 rating decision denying service connection for PTSD is final. 38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.104(a), 20.1103 (2018). 2. New and material evidence sufficient to reopen the Veteran’s claim of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD, has been received. 38 U.S.C. § 5108; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(a). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from June 1965 to June 1968. 1. Whether new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder New evidence means existing evidence not previously submitted to agency decision makers. Material evidence means existing evidence that, by itself or when considered with previous evidence of record, relates to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claim. New and material evidence can be neither cumulative nor redundant of the evidence of record at the time of the last prior final denial of the claim sought to be reopened, and must raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.156. For purposes of reopening a claim, the credibility of newly submitted evidence is generally presumed. See Justus v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 510, 513 (1992). A March 2003 rating decision denied service connection for PTSD. The claim was denied on the basis that the Veteran had failed to provide evidence of a current disability. The Veteran did not appeal the decision, nor was new and material evidence received within a year of the decision. The decision therefore became final. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.1103. In May 2013, the Veteran filed a petition to reopen his claim of service connection for a psychiatric disorder. The evidence added to the record since the March 2003 rating decision includes private treatment records that, in pertinent part, establish diagnoses of PTSD and major depressive affective disorder. The evidence is new, because it was not of record at the time of the March 2003 decision. The evidence is also material, because it contains evidence of a current disability. The evidence received is presumed credible, is neither cumulative nor redundant of the evidence of record, and raises a reasonable possibility of substantiating the Veteran’s claim. As such, the Veteran’s claim must be reopened. REASONS FOR REMAND 1. Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder to include post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depressive disorder is remanded. The Veteran asserts that he has an acquired psychiatric disorder, including PTSD and depressive disorder, related to service. The Veteran was afforded two VA examinations in October 2013 and September 2016. Neither VA examiner diagnosed the Veteran with PTSD, though both examiners did note stressors sufficient to meet the PTSD Criterion A. The September 2016 examiner noted that the Veteran had a diagnosis of PTSD under the DSM-IV from a private provider, but stated that the Veteran does not “warrant a diagnosis of PTSD in a forensic context.” The examiner provided no additional rationale. It is noted that the Veteran’s claim was certified to the Board after 2015 and so a PTSD diagnosis needs to be under the DSM-V. Additionally, both VA examiners failed to address the Veteran’s other diagnosed psychiatric disorders for which he is receiving treatment, including panic disorder, anxiety disorder, and depressive disorder. The Veteran submitted private and VA treatment records indicating these diagnoses and his treatment. Further, at the June 2018 Board hearing, the Veteran stated that his alcohol use since service was his attempt to self-medicate and treat his psychiatric disorders. No VA examiner has opined about the Veteran’s alcohol use and how it may relate to his psychiatric disorders. Nor has there been a clear opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran’s diagnosed psychiatric disorders, aside from PTSD. Another VA examination is warranted to determine the etiology of the Veteran’s acquired psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 311-12 (2007). The examiner should consider the Veteran’s treatment and the statements submitted from his daughter and counselor who discuss his symptoms and their belief that he under-reports symptoms. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain any outstanding treatment records. Contact the Veteran to determine whether there are any additional relevant private treatment records and obtain any necessary authorizations for such records. 2. Schedule the Veteran for a psychiatric examination to determine the nature and etiology of any acquired psychiatric disorder. Following a review of claims file, examination, and appropriate testing (if needed), the examiner should address the following: (a.) Identify/diagnose any acquired psychiatric disorder that presently exists or that has existed during the appeal period. The examiner should specifically state whether the criteria for a diagnosis of PTSD has been met. (b.) If a diagnosis of PTSD is made, the stressor(s) should be identified. Indicate whether the claimed in-service stressor is related to the Veteran’s fear of hostile military or terrorist activity (c.) For all acquired psychiatric disorders diagnosed, the examiner must opine whether each diagnosed disorder is at least as likely as not had its onset in service or within a year of service separation or is otherwise etiologically related to his active service. (d.) If service connection for a psychiatric disorder is established, the examiner should state whether the Veteran’s alcohol dependence was (i) caused or (2) aggravated (worsened) by the psychiatric disorder. MICHAEL A. HERMAN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD E. Rekowski, Associate Counsel