Citation Nr: 18144746 Decision Date: 10/25/18 Archive Date: 10/25/18 DOCKET NO. 15-00 073 DATE: October 25, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability, claimed as depression and sleep disorder is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from February 1981 to November 1982. This case is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2011 rating decision by a VA Regional Office (RO). The Veteran initially requested a Travel Board hearing, but later withdrew the hearing request in June 2018. In June 2018, the Board remanded this matter for further development. The matter is now back before the Board. The Board notes that the Veteran’s representative submitted a letter in September 2018 stating that he is in the process of obtaining additional medical evidence. However, he did not request any specific amount of time to leave the record open. As the Board cannot leave the record open indefinitely, it is proceeding with the review of this appeal. As set forth below, there is no prejudice to the Veteran since he or his representative will be able to submit additional evidence to the RO before the readjuication of the matter following this REMAND order. The Board notes that the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) complied with the Board’s June 2018 remand directives to schedule a VA examination for the Veteran. The AOJ attempted to schedule a VA examination in August 2018, but the Veteran failed to respond to neither phone calls with voicemail messages nor an appointment RSVP letter. However, as discussed below, the Board finds that more development is necessary prior to final adjudication of the appeal. The Board finds that it is unclear whether the August 2018 VA examination appointment letter was sent to the Veteran’s correct mailing address. When the RO was attempting to request for a new VA examination according to the Board’s June 2018 remand directives, the RO requester pointed out the discrepancy between the Veteran’s addresses from the databases of the Board and the Veterans’ Health Administration (VHA). As to the Veteran’s address from the Board’s database, the Board notes that the Veteran’s representative may have provided an incomplete address for the Veteran when he submitted a change of the address request in March 2015. The Board notes that the Veteran’s address provided by his representative in the March 2015 request did not include an apartment number. See March 2015 Letter from Representative. However, in May 2015, the Veteran submitted a statement with his address which included an apartment number 2302. See May 2015 Statement from the Veteran. From then on, any communications from the Board was sent to the Veteran’s address with the apartment number 2302, but some of them came back as returned mail. The Board also notes that the RO sent the August 2018 Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC) to the Veteran’s address without the apartment number as how it was provided by the Veteran’s representative in March 2015. Later in September 2018, the RO confirmed the Veteran’s receipt of the August 2018 SSOC during a phone call, therefore, the Veteran was not prejudiced by the confusion with his correct mailing address. See September 2018 VA-27-0820 Report of General Information. However, the Board notes that the Veteran’s address listed on the September 2018 contact report includes an apartment number 2301, which is another deviation from no apartment number, or the apartment number 2302. Id. As to the Veteran’s address from the VHA’s database, the Board notes that the August 2018 VA examination appointment letter was sent to an entirely different address from the Veteran’s address mentioned above. Again, it is unclear whether the address from the VHA’s database is the correct mailing address for the Veteran. The Board finds that it is necessary to identify the correct mailing address for the Veteran, and update the VA databases accordingly to ensure that the Veteran is able to receive any future VA communications and examination appointment letters. In light of the issue with the Veteran’s correct mailing address, the Board finds that the AOJ should schedule a new VA examination with an appropriate medical examiner to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran’s current psychiatric disability to include claimed depression and sleep disorder. However, the Board cautions the Veteran that he has a duty to cooperate in the development of his claim, and his failure to report for any scheduled VA examination without explanation may result in the denial of his claim. See Wood v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 191 (1991); 38 C.F.R. § 3.655 (2017). Moreover, the Board notes that the Veteran submitted private treatment records with a medical opinion from his private doctor and waived an AOJ review of that evidence. However, the Board cannot make a fully-informed decision on whether his current psychiatric disabilities were caused by an in-service incurrence of such disabilities, because the Veteran’s claims file is missing his service personnel records. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (2017). The Veteran contends that certain incidents and events during his service in Germany caused his sleeping disorder and other psychiatric disorders, but the Board cannot verify his contentions without reviewing all of his service personnel records. See September 2010 Veteran’s statement; May 2015 Veteran’s statement. The Veteran also indicated four different medical treatment facilities in Germany as places of treatments for his psychiatric disabilities, but whether any attempts were made to obtain such records is unclear from the evidence on record. See September 2010 VA form 21-526. Also, the Board noticed that there may be outstanding prison treatment records and halfway house records. See October 2015 D.R. letter. Accordingly, the matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. First, the AOJ should attempt contact the Veteran and obtain his current mailing address and the best means to inform him of his upcoming VA examination. If needed, the AOJ should ask for the Veteran’s representative’s assistance in identifying the Veteran’s correct mailing address. Once the AOJ confirms the Veteran’s correct mailing address, it should update the VA databases accordingly. 2. Next, to the extent possible, the AOJ should identify and obtain the following records and associate it with the electronic claims file: (a.) the Veteran’s complete service personnel records; (b.) the treatment records from the four medical facilities in Germany listed in the Veteran’s claim: 913th Medical Department, 34th General Hospital, 540th Medical Clinic, and Muenchweiler Clinic; and (c.) any prison treatment records including halfway house treatment records. 3. Then, the AOJ should schedule the Veteran for a new VA examination with an appropriate psychologist or psychiatrist. Any and all of the VA communications and the Veteran’s responses regarding the VA examination scheduling must be associated with the electronic claims file. The examiner must determine the nature and etiology of his current psychiatric disabilities to include the claimed depression and sleep disorder. The examiner should review the entire claims file and a copy of this REMAND order in conjunction with the examination. (a.) First, the examiner should identify any current psychiatric disabilities using the DSM-V criteria. (b.) Next, the examiner must opine whether each of the Veteran’s currently diagnosed psychiatric disorder is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability) related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. The examiner must provide a complete written rationale for any opinion offered. 4. After completing the above actions and any other necessary development, the claim must be readjudicated. If the claim remains denied, a SSOC must be provided to the Veteran and his representative. After they have had   an adequate opportunity to respond, the appeal must be returned to the Board for appellate review. MICHAEL LANE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD J. E. Kim, Associate Counsel