Citation Nr: 18106950 Decision Date: 06/01/18 Archive Date: 05/31/18 DOCKET NO. 15-08 240 DATE: June 1, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability, to include depression, delusional disorder and mood disorder, is remanded. Entitlement to an increased rating for a low back disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from October 1984 to October 1987. He received the Army Service Ribbon, Sharpshooter Badge, and Marksmanship Badge. Although the Veteran’s claim was initially limited to the question of entitlement to service connection for depression, including hearing voices, the medical evidence shows that he has also been diagnosed with delusional disorder and mood disorder. Therefore, the issue, as reflected on the title page of this decision, has been recharacterized as a broader claim of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability, to include depression, delusional disorder and mood disorder. See Clemons v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 1, 9 (2009). 1. Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability, to include depression, delusional disorder and mood disorder is remanded. The Veteran has a diagnosis of delusional disorder and mood disorder. September 2015 CAPRI, p. 12. He also suffered an in-service head injury and he was counseled for alcohol use while in service. March 2004 STRs, pp. 34, 47. There is no evidence of a nexus in the claims file despite an indication that the condition may be related to service. Accordingly, on remand the Veteran should be afforded an opportunity to undergo a VA examination to ascertain the etiology of his acquired psychiatric disability. McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). 2. Entitlement to an increased rating for a low back disability is remanded. The Board notes that the Veteran failed to RSVP for an examination in October 2017. In January 2018, VA received a Report of Incarceration indicating that the Veteran has been confined since January 2016. There is no indication that the Veteran has been released. On remand, the AOJ should afford the Veteran another opportunity to undergo a VA examination in accordance with the provisions found at the VBA M21-1 Adjudication Procedures Manual, Part III, Subpart iv, Chapter 3, Section F.2.d. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Determine if the Veteran remains confined. If so, attempt to reschedule the Veteran’s October 2017 VA examination, in accordance with VBA M21-1, III.iv.3.F.2.d., to ascertain the current severity and symptomatology of the Veteran’s back disability. All efforts to reschedule the examination should be documented and associated with the claims file. If these efforts are unsuccessful, a formal memorandum stating such should be associated with the claims file. 2. If the Veteran remains confined, schedule the Veteran for a VA examination, in accordance with VBA M21-1, III.iv.3.F.2.d., to ascertain the etiology of his acquired psychiatric disability, to include depression, delusional disorder and mood disorder. All efforts to reschedule the examination should be documented and associated with the claims file. If these efforts are unsuccessful, a formal memorandum stating such should be associated with the claims file. All indicated evaluations, studies, and tests deemed necessary by the examiner should be accomplished. The entire claims file, to include a complete copy of this REMAND, should be made available to the examiner designated to provide an opinion, and the examination report should include a discussion of the Veteran’s documented medical history and assertions. The examiner should offer comments, an opinion and a supporting rationale addressing whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) that the Veteran’s current acquired psychiatric disability was incurred in or aggravated by his active duty service. In providing this opinion, the examiner should address the Veteran’s in-service head injury and alcohol use. March 2004 STRs, pp. 34, 47. (Continued on the next page)   The examiner is advised that the Veteran is competent to report his symptoms and history, and such reports must be considered. If the examiner rejects the Veteran’s reports, the examiner must provide a reason for doing so. A. S. CARACCIOLO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD W.V. Walker, Associate Counsel