Citation Nr: 21073530 Decision Date: 12/09/21 Archive Date: 12/09/21 DOCKET NO. 16-46 481 DATE: December 9, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from February 1964 to July 1965. The Veteran appealed a September 2013 rating decision by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ). A Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) hearing was held in November 2019 before a Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) who has since retired from the Board. A transcript is of record. In October 2021, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) sent the Veteran a letter offering a new hearing. The Veteran has not since requested a new hearing. The Board finds that further evidentiary development is necessary and remands the case to ensure compliance with the Board's remand instructions. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). The February 2020 Board decision remanded the case for, among other actions, a new examination for an opinion to determine the etiology of the Veteran's acquired psychiatric disorder. As a result of the remand, an examination was scheduled. The Veteran arrived for his appointment, but was confused as to why he was there. Based on the meeting, the scheduled examination was canceled and no opinion was rendered. Given evidence that the Veteran may have been confused, that it is unclear as to exactly why the examination was cancelled, and given that the Veteran has a current psychiatric disorder that may impact his judgement, the Board finds the Veteran should be afforded another examination. Therefore, remand is in order. The Board notes that lack of cooperation and failure to report to an examination may be grounds for denial of the claim, especially when entitlement to a benefit cannot be established without a current examination. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.655. Importantly, the evidence notes diagnoses of various psychiatric disorders and the record contains multiple contentions and theories of entitlement. An examination is necessary to determine the current psychiatric disorder during the period on appeal and whether each disorder is related to service. The Board also notes that the February 2020 Board decision remanded the case to obtain the ship logs of U.S.S. Graham County for the periods spanning from September 1964 to January 1965. Obtained ship logs were associated with the record. However, it appears that the ship logs from October 11, 1964 to October 15, 1964 are missing. Attempts to obtain these missing ship logs should be made on remand. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain the complete deck logs for the U.S.S. Graham County, LST 1176, for the periods spanning from October 11, 1964 to October 15, 1964. 2. Obtain any outstanding VA and/or private treatment records relevant to treatment the Veteran received for his acquired psychiatric disorder that are not already of record. All obtained records should be associated with the evidentiary record. If any identified records are not obtainable (or none exist), the Veteran and his representative should be notified, and the record clearly documented. 3. After the development in #1 and #2 above is completed, schedule the Veteran for an examination to determine the nature and etiology of his acquired psychiatric disorder. The evidentiary record, including a copy of this remand, must be made available to and reviewed by the examiner. After the record review and examination of the Veteran, the examiner should identify all psychiatric disorders present during the period on appeal. Then for each identified disorder, the examiner is asked to respond to the following inquiries: a.) Is there clear and unmistakable (obvious or manifest, undebatable) medical evidence to demonstrate that a psychiatric condition existed prior to the Veteran's entrance into service? b.) If a psychiatric condition clearly and unmistakably preexisted the Veteran's active service, is there clear and unmistakable evidence that the disability was not aggravated beyond its natural progression during active service? c.) If a psychiatric condition is not found to have clearly and unmistakably preexisted service, is it at least as likely as not that the condition had its onset in service or is otherwise etiologically related to active service? In rendering these opinions, the examiner is advised that the Veteran is competent to report his symptoms and history. Such reports must be acknowledged and considered in formulating any opinion. If the examiner rejects the Veteran's reports, he or she must provide an explanation for such rejection. The examiner is not to improperly discount the Veteran's lay statements or mistakenly rely on an absence of medical evidence in the record to support his or her conclusions. A complete rationale for all opinions should be set forth and a discussion of the facts and medical principles involved would be of considerable assistance to the Board. If an opinion cannot be provided without resorting to mere speculation, the examiner must provide a complete explanation for why an opinion cannot be rendered. In so doing, the examiner must explain whether the inability to provide a more definitive opinion is the result of a need for additional information, or that he or she has exhausted the limits of current medical knowledge in providing an answer to that particular question(s). (Continued on the next page) 4. After the above development has been completed to the extent possible, readjudicate the claim. If any benefit sought remains denied, provide the Veteran and his representative with a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC), and return the case to the Board, if otherwise in order. DONNIE R. HACHEY Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Zheng, 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.