Citation Nr: 18143998
Decision Date: 10/22/18	Archive Date: 10/22/18

DOCKET NO. 07-07 385
DATE:	October 22, 2018
REMANDED
Whether the appellant's character of discharge is a bar to the receipt of Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) compensation benefits is remanded.
REASONS FOR REMAND
The appellant served on active duty from August 1967 to April 1970. He served in Vietnam and earned the Combat Action Ribbon. 
In April 2009, the Board declined to reopen the previously denied claim. The appellant appealed that decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). Based on a Joint Motion for Court Remand (Joint Motion) in January 2010, the Court remanded the Board’s decision for development in compliance with the Joint Motion. In July 2010, the Board remanded the claim for appropriate notice and readjudication. In October 2014, the Board issued a decision denying the claim, which the Veteran appealed to the Court. In July 2016, the Court issued a memorandum decision that set aside the Board’s October 2014 decision and remanded the matter for further proceedings. In March 2017, the Board remanded the claim for additional action by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ). 
The appellant testified in support of this claim during a hearing held at the RO before another Veterans Law Judge in August 2008. That Veterans Law Judge is not available to participate in this case. In August 2018, the Board advised the appellant of his right to testify at a new hearing. In August 2018 the appellant responded with a statement regarding the circumstances of his discharge but did not request a new hearing. 
Whether the appellant's character of discharge is a bar to the receipt of VA compensation benefits is remanded.
The appellant was afforded a December 2017 VA medical examination and opinion. The examiner opined that the appellant’s posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is more likely than not the result of combat traumas from the appellant’s Vietnam War service. Additionally, the examiner stated that due to the extent of the appellant’s polysubstance abuse at the time of the misconduct that led to his discharge, it was not possible to determine if the appellant had symptoms of PTSD or any other mental disorder at that time without resorting to mere speculation. However, the examiner did not provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not that the appellant’s polysubstance abuse was secondary to his PTSD or any other acquired psychiatric disorder. Therefore, a remand is necessary. 
The matter is REMANDED for the following action:
Return the appellant’s claims file to the December 2017 examiner for an addendum opinion. If the examiner is not available, schedule the Veteran for a VA psychiatric examination. 
The claims file must be made available to and reviewed by the examiner in conjunction with completion of the examination report.
The examiner should provide an opinion as to whether the appellant’s polysubstance abuse at the time of the misconduct that led to his discharge is at least as likely as not related to, aggravated by, or a manifestation of any diagnosed psychiatric condition, to include PTSD. 

The examiner must provide a comprehensive report including a complete rationale for all opinions and conclusions reached, citing the objective medical findings leading to the conclusions.
 
JENNIFER HWA
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	K. Parke