Citation Nr: 21000502 Decision Date: 01/05/21 Archive Date: 01/05/21 DOCKET NO. 18-49 143 DATE: January 5, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 30 percent for major depressive disorder with secondary alcohol use disorder is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from August 2005 to May 2007. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a rating decision issued in June 2018 by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office. In June 2020, the Veteran testified at a Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of the hearing is associated with the record. At such time, the Veteran waived Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) consideration of evidence associated with the file since the issuance of the September 2018 statement of the case. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1305(c). Thus, the Board may consider the entirety of the evidence of record. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 30 percent for major depressive disorder with secondary alcohol use disorder. Although the Board regrets the additional delay and appreciates the Veteran’s desire for a decision, a remand is necessary to ensure that due process is followed and that there is a complete record upon which to decide his claim so that he is afforded every possible consideration. In this regard, the Board observes that the Veteran was most recently examined by VA to determine the nature and severity of his service-connected psychiatric disability in April 2012, at which time the examiner found that such resulted in occupational and social impairment due to mild or transient symptoms which decrease work efficiency and ability to perform occupational tasks only during periods of significant stress; or, symptoms controlled by medication. In January 2018, a private psychologist completed a Disability Benefits Questionnaire (DBQ) in which she indicated that the Veteran’s psychiatric disability resulted in occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity. However, at the June 2020 Board hearing, the Veteran testified to increased and additional symptoms, to include difficulty sleeping, depression, anxiety, panic attacks, feelings of being overwhelmed at work and school, which results in a decrease in productivity, difficulty with relationships with family, co-workers, and friends, and suicidal ideation. Therefore, as the evidence suggests that the Veteran’s psychiatric symptomatology may have increased in severity since the April 2012 VA examination and January 2018 DBQ, a remand is necessary in order to afford him an appropriate VA examination in order to assess the current nature and severity of such service-connected disability. Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400 (1997); Caffrey v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 377 (1994); VAOPGCPREC 11-95 (1995). Furthermore, at the June 2020 hearing, the Veteran reported that he received ongoing psychiatric treatment through Dunbar Medical Associates. While he believed that such records had been submitted to VA, they are not on file. Therefore, a remand is necessary in order to obtain such outstanding private treatment records. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. After obtaining any necessary authorization from the Veteran, obtain all outstanding private treatment records pertinent to his psychiatric disability from Dunbar Medical Associates. Make at least two (2) attempts to obtain records from any identified source. If any such records are unavailable, inform the Veteran and afford him an opportunity to submit any copies in his possession. 2. Afford the Veteran a VA examination to determine the current nature and severity of his major depressive disorder with secondary alcohol use disorder. The record, to include a complete copy of this Remand, must be made available to the examiner. All indicated tests and studies should be accomplished. The examiner should describe the nature and severity of all manifestation of the Veteran’s major depressive disorder with secondary alcohol use disorder, and the resulting impact on his occupational and social functioning. A rationale for any opinion offered should be provided. A. JAEGER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Waite 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.