Citation Nr: 21015605 Decision Date: 03/17/21 Archive Date: 03/17/21 DOCKET NO. 17-06 490 DATE: March 17, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include anxiety disorder and depression, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from December 1975 to November 1977. The Veteran testified at a videoconference hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in October 2019. A transcript of that hearing is associated with the claims file. Since the RO last considered the Veteran’s claim in December 2016, additional evidence has been added to the Veteran’s claims file. The additional evidence includes a November 2019 nexus opinion. Although the Veteran has not provided a waiver of RO consideration of this evidence, a waiver is not needed in this case with respect to that evidence. An automatic waiver of Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) consideration applies in this case with respect to the November 2019 opinion submitted by the Veteran because the Veteran’s substantive appeal was received after February 2, 2013, and the Veteran has not requested the Board to remand the case for AOJ consideration of the evidence. See 38 U.S.C. § 7105(e) (2012). Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include anxiety disorder and depression is remanded. The Veteran contends that his acquired psychiatric disorder is related to his active duty service. Specifically, he alleges that he experienced anxiety and mood lability during active duty service, and that he relates his psychiatric symptoms to an incident during service in which he almost fell out of a helicopter. In support of his claim, the Veteran submitted a November 2019 letter from D.C., PMHNP BC, who opined that the Veteran’s “experience in the military contributed to his current anxiety and depression.” While the opinion is clearly based upon consideration of the Veteran’s lay statements and a two-year history of treatment, it is unclear from the opinion that the Veteran’s service treatment records or post-service psychiatric history prior to 2017 were considered. Nevertheless, as the Veteran has provided lay statements of in-service psychiatric symptoms and the November 2019 opinion suggests that the Veteran’s psychiatric disorder may be related to his active duty service, the Veteran should be afforded a VA examination to assess the etiology of his diagnosed anxiety disorder and depressive disorder. 38 U.S.C. § 5103A(d)(2), 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(4)(i); see also McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79, 83 (2006). Additionally, the record reflects that the Veteran may be in receipt of disability benefits from the Social Security Administration (SSA). The Veteran’s SSA records have not been associated with the claims file. VA has a duty to obtain potentially relevant SSA records. Golz v. Shinseki, 590 F.3d 1317 (Fed. Cir. 2010). As the SSA records may contain evidence relevant to the Veteran’s claims, they must be obtained. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Contact the SSA and request a copy of the Veteran’s complete SSA disability benefits file, including any administrative decision(s) on the Veteran’s application for SSA disability benefits and all of the associated medical records relating to his award of SSA disability benefits. A copy of any response(s) from SSA, to include (if applicable) a negative reply, must be included in the claims file. All records provided by SSA also must be included in the claims file. 2. Provide the Veteran with a VA examination conducted by a VA psychiatrist or psychologist, to determine the existence and etiology of his depression with anxiety. The claims file must be made available to and reviewed by the examiner. Any indicated tests and studies must be completed. Following review of the claims file and examination of the Veteran, the examiner is asked to provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent probability or greater) that the Veteran’s acquired psychiatric disability was incurred in or caused by active duty service. The examiner is asked to provide a complete explanation and rationale for the opinion(s) provided, and is also requested to discuss the Veteran’s lay statements and testimony of psychiatric symptomatology in the record. The examiner is advised that the Veteran is competent to report symptoms capable of lay observation. ANTHONY C. SCIRÉ, JR Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Katz, 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.