Citation Nr: 18140213 Decision Date: 10/02/18 Archive Date: 10/02/18 DOCKET NO. 14-21 828 DATE: October 2, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for depression and anxiety is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from February 1999 to February 2002, followed by service in the Army and Navy Reserves from February 2002 to October 2004. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from a September 2013 rating decision which denied service connection for depression and anxiety. The Veteran testified in July 2018 at a Travel Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ). A copy of the transcript is of record. Entitlement to service connection for depression and anxiety is remanded. The Board cannot make a fully-informed decision on the issue of entitlement to service connection for depression and anxiety. In July 2018, the Veteran testified that while stationed at Fort Campbell, Kentucky, he was involved in a motor vehicle accident as a passenger. He stated that he did not seek medical treatment at the time, but that the military police made a report. He stated that after the accident, he began to have nightmares, anxiety, and panic attacks. The Veteran’s complete service treatment records are not associated with the Veteran’s electronic claims file and the AOJ has made a formal finding of unavailability. The Board notes that while the Veteran denied nervous trouble and depression in an October 2003 enlistment examination, he reported having nervousness in a July 2004 dental health questionnaire. The Veteran stated during the Board hearing that he attempted to obtain the military police report, but was not able to acquire the report. The record does not reflect that the AOJ has attempted to obtain this report. The Board finds that a remand is warranted, so that the AOJ can request and obtain the military police report from Fort Campbell. The Veteran was unsure of the exact date of the accident, but believed the accident occurred in the summer of 1999 or 2000 and the Veteran’s military personnel records reflect he was stationed at Fort Campbell from May 1999 to December 2000. A September 2011 mental health screening note reflects that the Veteran reported first experiencing symptoms around age 25 and that he had sought non-VA treatment about a year prior to the September 2011 treatment. No private mental health treatment records are associated with the Veteran’s electronic claims file. Upon remand, the VA should obtain authorization and request these records. Evidence indicates that there may be outstanding relevant VA treatment records. During the July 2018 Board hearing, the Veteran reported that he was treated at the Reno VAMC around 2006. The earliest VA treatment records are dated in 2011 from the Portland VAMC. Any VA treatment records are within VA’s constructive possession, and are considered potentially relevant to the issue on appeal. A remand is required to allow VA to obtain any treatment records from the Reno VAMC prior to 2011. The matter is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Obtain from the appropriate source the military police report regarding the motor vehicle accident the Veteran was involved in while stationed at Fort Campbell, Kentucky. Document all requests for information as well as all responses in the claims file. 2. Ask the Veteran to complete a VA Form 21-4142 for any private treatment for his depression and anxiety, to include in the year prior to 2011. Make two requests for the authorized records from the identified providers, unless it is clear after the first request that a second request would be futile. 3. Obtain the Veteran’s VA treatment records prior to 2011, to include from the Reno VAMC. 4. Schedule the Veteran for a psychiatric examination to determine the nature and etiology of any depression and anxiety. The examiner must opine whether any diagnosed disorder is at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, to include the Veteran’s report of an in-service automobile accident in 1999 or 2000 and his report of nervousness in 2004. 5. After completing the above, and any other development as may be indicated, the Veteran’s claim should be readjudicated based on the entirety of the evidence. If the claim remains denied, the Veteran and his representative should be issued a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC).   An appropriate period of time should be allowed for response. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration, if otherwise in order. K. PARAKKAL Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD S. Owen, Associate Counsel