Citation Nr: 21073283 Decision Date: 12/08/21 Archive Date: 12/08/21 DOCKET NO. 16-29 997 DATE: December 8, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include affective mood disorder, delusional disorder, major depressive disorder, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the Army from December 1972 to April 1973. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2015 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). A February 2020 Board decision reopened and remanded the claim, and an August 2020 Board decision denied the claim. The Veteran appealed the Board's denial to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In June 2021, the Court vacated and remanded the Board decision consistent with a Joint Motion for Remand (JMR). Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include affective mood disorder, delusional disorder, major depressive disorder, and PTSD. The Veteran contends that he suffered bullying, physical abuse, and military sexual trauma (MST) during his service. He testified that in 1973, when he was only 17 years old, he was sexually assaulted by three men while serving on guard duty at a base in Fort Ord. November 2019 Hearing Tr. at 4-6; see also May 2013 VA Treatment Record. He stated that he was branded with a soldering iron, burned, stabbed with a screwdriver, and cut. Id. at 5. At about the same night or another night, the Veteran indicated that the three men again sexually assaulted him. Id. The Veteran stated that he was held down, a nail was hammered tohis left foot, and he was tied down to a pole while his feet were nailed. Id. at 5-6. He further stated that battery acid was placed on a dime and taped to his genitalia. Id. at 6. The Veteran indicated that one of the men sexually assaulted him and forced him to undergo sexual acts that resulted in the Veteran cracking in half one of his teeth. Id. The next morning, while on guard duty, the Veteran indicated that he was forced to fire his weapon towards other military individuals who threatened him as they attempting to enter a gate. Id. In the December 2011 VA examination, the Veteran explained that the reason he was physically assaulted during service was because he refused to join special forces. The Board notes that the Veteran's reports have not been corroborated by the service records. In accordance with the JMR, a new VA medical opinion is required for adjudication. Here, the March 2020 VA examiner considered the Veteran's report of MST, but there is no indication that his reports of bullying and physical assault were considered. As noted above, the Veteran reported that he was bullied and picked on, sent on guard duty alone, and that he later suffered physical abuse and MST. Additionally, the March 2020 examiner diagnosed major depressive disorder and noted diagnoses of PTSD, delusional disorder, and psychotic disorder, but only provided a nexus opinion for the Veteran's "mood disorder." As more than one psychiatric disorder was shown during the appeal period, and the Veteran is seeking benefits for his symptoms regardless of how they are diagnosed, a nexus opinion for each disorder is required. Moreover, the JMR noted that a physical evaluation of Veteran's body has not been performed despite the Veteran's claim that he has multiple scars on his body as a result of the MST that he experienced during service. The Veteran contends that he was branded with a soldering iron, burned, stabbed with a screwdriver, and cut. He also contends that he was held down while a nail was hammered to his left foot, and he was tied down to a pole while his feet were nailed. He further contends that battery acid was placed on a dime and taped to his genitalia. Accordingly, a VA examiner must examine the Veteran's body for scars. Therefore, to ensure that VA has met its duty to assist, remand is required. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. Accordingly, the matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule an examination with an appropriate clinician to determine whether the examiner has any scarring. The Veteran contends that during service he was branded with a soldering iron, burned, stabbed with a screwdriver, and cut. He also contends that he was held down while a nail was hammered to his left foot, and he was tied down to a pole while his feet were nailed. He further contends that battery acid was placed on a dime and taped to his genitalia. The examiner should have the Veteran specifically identify the location of any scarring. 2. Then, schedule the Veteran for an examination to determine the nature and etiology of his acquired psychiatric disorders. He is currently diagnosed with affective mood disorder, delusional disorder, major depressive disorder, and PTSD. See July 2015 SSA Records; September 2015 VA examination report; March 2020 VA examination report. The examiner must review the claims file, to include the examination report referenced in remand directive #1. The examiner is asked to provide a response to the following: a) For the PTSD, explain how the diagnostic criteria are met and opine whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) related to service, including the Veteran's reports of bullying, physical abuse, and MST. b) For each of the other acquired psychiatric disabilities, opine whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that such disability is related to service, including the Veteran's reports of bullying, physical abuse, and MST. If the examiner determines that the evidence indicates military sexual trauma, bullying, or physical assault occurred, then the examiner should explain the basis for this finding to include any in-service markers suggestive of a personal assault. The Board notes that separation psychiatric and skin evaluations were normal and revealed no branding or scarring, there is no documentation of in-service dental treatment for loss of tooth or a cracking of a tooth in half, during service the Veteran's efficiency and conduct ratings were excellent, there is no documentation pertaining to the Veteran discharging his weapon in the line of duty, and the in-service medical board was conducted when the Veteran was a basic trainee and not at a time when he could have been offered duty with special forces. (Continued on the next page) 3. After the above development, and any additionally indicated development, has been completed, readjudicate the issue on appeal. If the benefit sought is not granted to the Veteran's satisfaction, send the Veteran a Supplemental Statement of the Case and provide an opportunity to respond. If necessary, return the case to the Board for further appellate review. Rebecca N. Poulson Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Thaddaeus J. Cox, 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.