Citation Nr: 21073352 Decision Date: 12/08/21 Archive Date: 12/08/21 DOCKET NO. 16-25 783 DATE: December 8, 2021 REMANDED Service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability, including schizophrenia, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from March 1979 to August 1979 in the United States Marine Corps, with additional service in the Marine Corps Reserves. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2014 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office. In July 2021, the Veteran and V.N. testified before the undersigned during a virtual hearing. Service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability, including schizophrenia, is remanded. The Veteran has current schizophrenia, documented, for example, in an October 2018 VA treatment record. As a matter of clarification, the record does not contain any indication of posttraumatic stress disorder, and the Veteran has not raised any contentions regarding such a diagnosis. As such, development particular to posttraumatic stress disorder is not indicated. At the July 2021 hearing, the Veteran testified that he first experienced symptoms of his current schizophrenia while serving in the military. He testified that the sounds of gunfire and exploding mortar shells triggered the onset of his initial symptoms, and that he has experienced continuous symptomatology since then. The Veteran's longtime friend from childhood, V.N., also testified and similarly recounted her personal observations of the onset of unusual behaviors in the Veteran during his military service, and the lack of any such symptoms prior to that time. Additionally, a June 1981 treatment record generated during the time of the Veteran's service in the Marine Corps Reserves documents that his commanding officer questioned his fitness for duty and competency, and requested that a psychological evaluation be conducted. Subsequent service treatment records, however, do not indicate that the requested evaluation was ever performed. The Board thus finds there is an indication that the current schizophrenia may be related to service. A VA medical opinion has not yet been obtained for the claim, and one must be provided prior to appellate adjudication. See McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). While on remand, the exact dates and character of the Veteran's service in the Marine Corps Reserves, to include on the date of the June 1981 service treatment record discussed, should also be clarified for the record. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Contact the National Personnel Record Center and/or the appropriate service entity to identify the exact dates for all periods of active duty, active duty for training, and inactive duty for training performed by the Veteran, to include his duty status on June 13, 1981. Document all requests for information as well as all responses received in the claims file. 2. Afford the Veteran a VA examination to obtain evidence addressing the etiology of any acquired psychiatric disability, including schizophrenia. A rationale must be provided for all conclusions reached. Opine on whether it is at least as likely as not that the current acquired psychiatric disability, including, but not limited to, schizophrenia, began during active service or is related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. If there is a medical basis to support or doubt the history provided by the Veteran, the examiner should provide a fully reasoned explanation. In rendering this opinion, the examiner is asked to consider the following: Hearing testimony of the Veteran and his childhood friend, V.N., regarding the onset of his psychiatric symptomatology during military service (Continued on the next page) June 1981 Marine Corps Reserves record documenting that the Veteran's commanding officer questioned his fitness for duty and competency, and requested that a psychological evaluation be conducted L.M. YASUI Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Smith, 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.