Citation Nr: 21063528 Decision Date: 10/14/21 Archive Date: 10/14/21 DOCKET NO. 18-23 158A DATE: October 14, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent prior to May 23, 2019 and in excess of 50 percent thereafter for bilateral pes planus has been withdrawn. REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety, and depression is remanded. FINDING OF FACT On June 23, 2021, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received notification from the Veteran that he wanted to withdraw his claim for an initial rating in excess of 10 percent prior to May 23, 2019 and in excess of 50 percent thereafter for bilateral pes planus. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for withdrawal have been met, and the appeal regarding a claim of entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent prior to May 23, 2019 and in excess of 50 percent thereafter for bilateral pes planus by the Veteran have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had honorable active service with the United States Army from February 1999 to February 2003 with additional service in the U.S. Army Reserve. This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from March 2017, and May 2017 rating decisions of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) RO. The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) in a June 2021 virtual hearing. A transcript of this hearing has been associated with the claims file. During the hearing, the Veteran indicated his desire to withdraw his increased rating claim. Additionally, the Veteran's attorney noted that the Veteran has been diagnosed with multiple psychiatric conditions. Therefore, the PTSD claim is recharacterized as entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder as shown on the title page. See Clemons v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 1 (2009) (When a Veteran makes a claim, they are seeking service connection for symptoms regardless of how those symptoms are diagnosed or labeled). Entitlement to an initial rating excess of 10 percent prior to May 23, 2019 and in excess of 50 percent thereafter for bilateral pes planus The Board may dismiss any appeal which fails to allege specific error of fact or law in the determination being appealed. 38 U.S.C. § 7105. An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal at any time before the Board promulgates a decision. 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. Withdrawal may be made by the Veteran or by his or her authorized representative. 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. In the present case, the Veteran withdrew the issue of an initial rating excess of 10 percent prior to May 23, 2019 and in excess of 50 percent thereafter for bilateral pes planus during the June 2021 Board hearing. Hence, there remains no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration. Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the appeal of this issue and it is dismissed. REASONS FOR REMAND Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD, anxiety, and depression is remanded. The Veteran contends that he has a psychiatric disorder related to his active military service. VA treatment records note diagnoses of various psychiatric disorders including major depressive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder with a notation of "? PTSD." He previously had two VA examinations. According the April 2016 VA examination reported a diagnosis of PTSD as well as major depressive disorder with anxious distress which were both noted to be related to his pre-military history. In February 2017 VA examination report, the examiner stated said Veteran did not meet DSM-5 criteria for PTSD, but the major depressive disorder was not related to his military service. Examiners found the diagnoses to be related to pre-military sexual trauma and childhood abuse. According to the January 1999 the entrance examination, the Veteran's psychiatric evaluation was noted to be normal. Thus, the Veteran was in sound condition upon entrance to service. 38 U.S.C. § 1111. Therefore, for this period, the examiner should have provided opinion on whether the claimed conditions clearly and unmistakably existed prior to service, and if so, the rationales should have discussed whether the condition was not aggravated beyond its natural progression by an in-service injury, event, or illness. Without further clarification, the Board is without medical expertise to determine the nature and etiology of the claimed disability. Colvin v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 171 (1991). In light of the above, the Board finds that a new VA examination opinion must be obtained. The Board notes that during the June 2021 Board hearing, the Veteran indicated that his service-connected disabilities affect his mental health, in part due to pain. Thus, on remand the examiner should address whether the Veteran's current psychiatric disorder was caused or aggravated by a service-connected disability. Additionally, the Veteran's military personnel records reflects that he has additional service in the U.S. Army Reserve. In this regard, in personnel records reflect that he enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve and has been assigned to a drill pay status at various times since 2003. However, the record does not contain specific additional active service dates. Thus, the Board finds that a remand is necessary in order for the AOJ to obtain and provide information regarding the Veteran's periods of service in the U.S. Army Reserve, including any active duty for training or inactive duty for training. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Verify all active duty for training and inactive duty training dates for service in the U.S. Army Reserve from 2003 through present. If necessary, a request should be made to the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS). A summary of those dates should be documented in the record. Document all requests for information as well as all responses in the claims file. 2. Schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the nature and etiology of any acquired psychiatric disorder. The examiner must respond to the following: (a.) List any and all acquired psychiatric disorders with which the Veteran is presently diagnosed or has been diagnosed during the appeal period. (b.) Opine whether any current acquired psychiatric disorder is at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease during his active service from January 1999 to 2003; or, (b.) whether it clearly and unmistakably (undebatable) preexisted the Veteran's period of active service beginning January 1999, period of active duty for training, or inactive duty for training. (c.) If the examiner finds it did clearly and unmistakably preexist service, the examiner must opine whether it was clearly and unmistakably not aggravated by service. (d.) Alternatively, the examiner is asked to opine as to whether it is at least as likely as not that any current acquired psychiatric disorder had its onset during any verified period of active duty for training or inactive duty for training. (e.) The examiner should also provide an opinion as to whether any current psychiatric disorder is at least as likely as not (a) caused by, or (b) aggravated by (worsened beyond natural progression) his service-connected disabilities, to include the effects that those conditions have on his life. A complete rationale for all medical opinions is required. The examiner should identify and explain the relevance or significance, as appropriate, of any history, clinical findings, medical knowledge, or literature, etc., relied upon in reaching the conclusion(s). The examiner is specifically asked to consider the December 2002 Report of Medical History associated with separation noting the Veteran's report of depression or excessive worry and receipt of counseling and evaluation and treatment for a mental condition as well accompanying statement that he experienced stress and depression after being deployed and was diagnosed with excessive compulsive disorder prior to entering the military. Cynthia M. Bruce Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board R. Williams, 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.