Citation Nr: 20074595 Decision Date: 11/20/20 Archive Date: 11/20/20 DOCKET NO. 11-12 504 DATE: November 20, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a psychiatric disorder other than posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from August 1967 to September 1967. In support of his claims, the Veteran testified at a videoconference hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge of the Board in July 2018. A copy of the transcript has been associated with the claims file. Additionally, this appeal was previously remanded by the Board in October 2015, March 2017, and March 2019. The requested actions have been completed and the appeal is once again before the Board. Regrettably, however, the Board finds another remand is necessary for clarification in light of the findings articulated by the VA examiner in the July 2020 examination. Specifically, the VA examiner confirmed a diagnosis of unspecified anxiety disorder and determined the undiagnosed anxiety disorder preexisted the Veteran’s entrance into military service, and continued during and since service. See July 2020 VA Mental Disorders Disability Benefits Questionnaire (DBQ) and Medical Opinion. The examiner then concluded that it was less likely than not that this currently diagnosed disorder was due to the Veteran’s military service. The Board finds that the opinion proffered by the July 2020 VA examiner is the incorrect legal standard in a claim where the disorder may have pre-existed the Veteran’s military service. As such, the Board affords this opinion no probative value. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 311 (2007). Therefore, the Board finds an addendum opinion is necessary to determine whether the Veteran’s currently diagnosed unspecified anxiety disorder clearly and unmistakable pre-existed service and, if so, was it clearly and unmistakably aggravated by the Veteran’s military service beyond the natural progress of the disease. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain and associate with the claims file any outstanding VA or private treatment records, if applicable. All actions to obtain the requested records should be documented fully in the claims file. 2. After completing the foregoing development, the RO should obtain an addendum opinion from the July 2020 VA examiner, if available. If the July 2020 VA examiner is not available, any qualified medical professional may provide the requested opinion regarding the nature and etiology of the unspecified anxiety disorder. The examiner is asked to opine on the following: (a.) Did the Veteran’s unspecified anxiety disorder CLEARLY AND UNMISTAKABLY EXIST prior to the Veteran’s entrance onto active duty in August 1967? When answering this question, please phrase it as either “the Veteran’s unspecified anxiety disorder (did/ did not) clearly and unmistakably exist prior to the Veteran’s entrance onto active duty.” (b.) If the examiner determines that the Veteran’s unspecified anxiety disorder did exist prior to the Veteran’s entrance onto active duty, the examiner should state an opinion as to whether the unspecified anxiety disorder CLEARLY AND UNMISTAKABLY DID NOT undergo an increase in severity during service or, if there was an increase, whether it was in the natural progression of the disease. In providing the opinion regarding the preexistence of the Veteran’s psychiatric disorder, the examiner should specifically comment on the fact that June 1966 Entrance Examination does not include a notation of a psychiatric disorder. Further, the examiner is asked to comment on the prior July 2020 determination that the psychiatric disorder pre-existed serivce is based solely on the statements from the Veteran made during the July 2020 examination itself and not found in any medical evidence contemporaneous with his service entrance. (c.) Alternatively, if the examiner determines that the Veteran’s unspecified anxiety disorder DID NOT exist prior to the Veteran’s entrance into active duty, THE EXAMINER SHOULD STATE AN OPINION AS TO WHETHER IT IS AT LEAST AS LIKELY AS NOT (A 50 PERCENT OR GREATER PROBABILITY) THAT THE DIAGNOSED PSYCHIATRIC DISORDER IS RELATED TO SERVICE. A clear rationale for all opinions would be helpful and a discussion of the facts and medical principles involved would be of considerable assistance to the Board. Because it is important “that each disability be viewed in relation to its history [,]” (38 C.F.R. § 4.1), copies of all pertinent records in the Veteran’s claims file, or in the alternative, the claims file, must be made available to the examiner for review. 3. THE AOJ MUST REVIEW THE CLAIMS FILE AND ENSURE THAT THE FOREGOING DEVELOPMENT ACTION HAS BEEN COMPLETED IN FULL. IF ANY DEVELOPMENT IS INCOMPLETE, APPROPRIATE CORRECTIVE ACTION MUST BE IMPLEMENTED. IF ANY REPORT DOES NOT INCLUDE ADEQUATE RESPONSES TO THE SPECIFIC OPINIONS REQUESTED, IT MUST BE RETURNED TO THE PROVIDING EXAMINER FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION. YVETTE R. WHITE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board T. Berry, Counsel The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.