Citation Nr: 21062973 Decision Date: 10/12/21 Archive Date: 10/12/21 DOCKET NO. 17-08 974 DATE: October 12, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from January 1970 to October 1971. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2015 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The case was remanded in February 2019 for additional development. The Board denied entitlement to service connection for PTSD and TDIU by a January 2021 decision, which the Veteran appealed. In an August 2021 Order, the Court granted the Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMPR) and vacated the Board's January 2021 decision as to entitlement to service connection for PTSD only. The case was returned to the Board for compliance with the terms of the JMPR. The JMPR specifically requested the Court to dismiss the issue of entitlement to a total disability rating based upon individual unemployability (TDIU) in the introductory paragraphs as well as the conclusion section. However, of further note, the JMPR did instruct the Board that if it determines that service connection for PTSD is warranted, then it should consider whether the evidence shows that it results in individual unemployability. 1. PTSD More information is needed to allow the Board to make a fully informed decision. The Board previously determined that VA examination as necessary to decide this claim, but the Veteran failed to report for VA examinations on two occasions. A July 2015 private assessment referenced by the JMPR notes a diagnosis of PTSD and references multiple stressors during and after service. In an August 2021 brief, the Veteran's attorney appears to suggest that the Veteran would be willing to appear for VA examination. Accordingly, a remand is necessary to provide the Veteran with a VA examination by an appropriately qualified mental health professional. The Board notes that pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 3.655, when a claimant fails to report for an examination, the claim shall be rated based on the evidence of record. In light of the JMPR, the Board will remand and instruct the AOJ to provide the Veteran a final opportunity to participate in a VA psychiatric examination with a qualified mental health professional. The Board alerts the Veteran and her representative that should the AOJ be unable to make contact with the Veteran or should she fail to report for an examination, her claims may be adjudicated based on the evidence of record upon return to the Board. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: Contact the Veteran and schedule her for a psychiatric examination with a qualified mental health professional at a mutually convenient time. The examiner is asked to determine the nature and etiology of any posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). If the Veteran is diagnosed with PTSD, the examiner must explain how the diagnostic criteria are met and opine whether it is at least as likely as not related to a verified in-service stressor. The examiner must opine whether the evidence of record, including the Veteran's lay statements and the Veteran's service records, corroborate the claim that a personal assault occurred in service (38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f)(5)). The examiner is instructed to reference the May 2015 Memorandum by the Denver Regional Office in making his/her conclusions. If the examiner finds that evidence indicates that a personal assault occurred during the Veteran's active service, the examiner must opine whether any PTSD is at least as likely as not related to the in-service personal assault. If any other acquired psychiatric disorders are diagnosed, the examiner must opine whether each diagnosed disorder is at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, to include a personal assault or other event in service. If the Veteran fails to report for VA examination, the examiner should provide opinion as to whether the Veteran's actual availability for interview is necessary to properly provide the opinions sought. If her availability is not necessary, the examiner should provide an opinion based on the evidence of record. T. MAINELLI Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board AD 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.