Citation Nr: 21067095 Decision Date: 11/03/21 Archive Date: 11/03/21 DOCKET NO. 10-45 529 DATE: November 3, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, and substance-induced mood disorder, is denied. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from August 1966 to September 1969. The Veteran passed away in December 2016. The appellant is the Veteran's surviving child and she has been recognized as the substitute appellant in this appeal. This matter is on appeal from a February 2008 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans (VA) Regional Office (RO). 1. Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric condition, to include PTSD, depression, and substance-induced mood disorder, is remanded. This matter most recently came before the Board in May 2021, whereupon it was remanded to allow for additional development, namely obtaining an etiology opinion. The June 2021 VA examiner opined that the Veteran's claimed condition was less likely than not (less than 50 percent probability) incurred in or caused by the claimed in-service injury, event or illness. The examiner noted that the VA and medical health records do not clearly and irrefutably state that the Veteran's PTSD, depression or substance induced mood disorder had their clinical onset in service and that lay statements were not supported by the medical records that indicate that stress related symptoms had been as a result of time in service. The Board finds that this opinion is inadequate as the VA examiner appeared to use an improper evidentiary standard. The examiner was requested to determine whether the Veteran's acquired psychiatric disorder was "at least as likely as not" caused by his military service, which is a less precise standard than the one apparently employed by the VA examiner. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.303; McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79, 83-84 (2006). As such, a remand is necessary to provide a medical opinion that applies the correct evidentiary standard. See Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 312 (2007) (noting that when VA undertakes to provide a VA examination or obtain a VA opinion, it must ensure that the examination or opinion is adequate). The matter is REMANDED for the following action: Obtain a new opinion from an appropriate examiner. The clinician should be given a copy of this Board remand. The examiner should respond to each of the following questions: (A) Is it at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or more) that the Veteran's PTSD had its onset in, was caused by, or is otherwise related to service? (B) Is it at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or more) that the Veteran's depression with anxiety had its onset in, was caused by, or is otherwise related to service? (C) Is it at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or more) that the Veteran's substance induced mood disorder had its onset in, was caused by, or is otherwise related to service? (D) Comment upon whether the Veteran's alcohol and substance abuse was related to any diagnosed psychiatric disability, including whether such abuse was an attempt to self-medicate. For purposes of providing this opinion, accept as valid and comment upon whether the Veteran's statements that his acquired psychiatric symptoms began in 1968. Specifically, the Veteran reported after service he experienced nightmares, intrusive thoughts about killing, irritability, domestic fights with his former wife, and hypervigilant behavior. See February 2008 VA Treatment Record and September 2010 VA Examination. In offering any opinion, the examiner shoulder consider medical and lay evidence dated both prior to and since the filing of the claim for service connection, including: i. November 2007 Social Security Administration Medical Record; ii. February 2008 VA Treatment Record; iii. September 2010 VA Examination; iv. March 2015 Appellant's Lay Statement; and v. May 2007 Veteran's Statement in Support of Claim. In offering any opinion, the examiner should provide special consideration regarding the appellant's theory of the case- that is, her father's acquired psychiatric disabilities had their onset in service. The examiner should provide a complete rationale for any opinion rendered. If the examiner's opinion is negative, he or she must clearly explain why. If he or she cannot provide the requested opinions without resorting to speculation, he or she should expressly indicate this and provide a supporting rationale as to why that is so. KRISTY L. ZADORA Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Kashif I. Ali, Associate 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.