Citation Nr: 21008616 Decision Date: 02/17/21 Archive Date: 02/17/21 DOCKET NO. 16-11 514A DATE: February 17, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include major depressive disorder, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND Although the Board regrets the additional delay, a remand is necessary to ensure that due process is followed and that there is a complete record upon which to decide the Veteran’s claim so that he is afforded every possible consideration. See 38 U.S.C. § 5103A; 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. The Veteran had active military service from November 1964 to October 1966. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from the September 2014 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). This matter was previously before the Board in September 2020 and was remanded for further development. Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include major depressive disorder is remanded. The Veteran contends that his major depression disorder is related to his military service. As noted above, this matter was previously before the Board in September 2020 and was remanded for further development. Specifically, one of the remand directives was to obtain an addendum opinion to determine the nature and etiology of any psychiatric disability. Subsequently, in November 2020, an addendum opinion was obtained. The examiner opined that the Veteran’s diagnosed conditions of major depressive disorder, mild, recurrent, and generalized anxiety disorder related to the Veteran’s claimed depressive disorder not otherwise specified and anxiety/schizophrenia, are less likely than not related to the Veteran’s military service. The examiner explained that there are no service records indicating service connection for these disorders. Although the examiner acknowledged the Veteran’s lay statements noting that his experience in the military caused mental health concerns, the examiner concluded that the Veteran’s anxiety and depression appear to have developed later in life due to situational stressors. Therefore, the examiner concluded that there is a lack of nexus support between the Veteran’s military service and acquired psychiatric disorders, despite the Veteran’s lay statements. However, the Board finds that the November 2020 opinion is inadequate as the examiner did not properly consider the Veteran’s lay statements regarding his acquired psychiatric disorders. Although the examiner referenced the Veteran’s lay statements, the examiner does not discuss why they are not credible and/or competent to establish a nexus for direct service connection. The Board also notes that it appears that the Veteran’s service treatment records may not be complete, as the only records consist of entrance examinations. Therefore, a remand is warranted for the Veteran to undergo another VA examination to determine the etiology of any diagnosed psychiatric disorder. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the nature and etiology of any diagnosed psychiatric disorder. The examiner must opine whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that any diagnosed psychiatric disorder is related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. The examiner must consider the Veteran’s lay statements in forming any opinion. All opinions provided must be thoroughly explained and an adequate rationale for any conclusions reached must be provided. The examiner should not rely solely on the absence of evidence of in-service treatment or injury in the Veteran’s service treatment records as a basis for any given opinion. If any requested opinion cannot be provided without resort to speculation, the medical professional should state and explain why an opinion cannot be provided without resort to speculation. 2. Following completion of the above, and a review of any additional evidence received, the RO should also undertake any other development it deems to be necessary, to include, if warranted, an addendum medical opinion which considers any newly received evidence. MICHAEL MARTIN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Mountford, 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.