Citation Nr: 21015967 Decision Date: 03/18/21 Archive Date: 03/18/21 DOCKET NO. 18-46 456 DATE: March 18, 2021 ORDER New and material evidence has been received and the claim of entitlement to service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is reopened. REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for PTSD is remanded. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The October 2014 rating decision that reopened and denied the Veteran’s claim of entitlement to service connection for PTSD is final. 2. Evidence received since the October 2014 rating decision is both new and material to the claim of entitlement to service connection for PTSD. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The October 2014 rating decision that reopened and denied the service connection claim for PTSD is final. See 38 U.S.C. §§ 7103, 7104 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.156, 20.1100 (2019). 2. Evidence received subsequent to the last final decision is new and material and the claim of service connection for PTSD is reopened. 38 U.S.C. § 5108 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(a) (2019). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran, who is the appellant in this case, served on active duty in the United States Marine Corps from November 2001 to December 2001, and from May 2003 to May 2007. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a November 2017 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran testified at a March 2021 Board virtual hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A copy of the hearing transcript will be associated with the claims file. Regardless of any RO determinations on the applications to reopen, the Board has a jurisdictional responsibility to consider whether it is proper for the claims to be reopened. See Jackson v. Principi, 265 F.3d 1366, 1369 (Fed. Cir. 2001). The Board has limited the discussion below to the relevant evidence required to support its finding of fact and conclusion of law, as well as to the specific contentions regarding the case as raised directly by the Veteran and those reasonably raised by the record. See Scott v. McDonald, 789 F.3d 1375, 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2015); Robinson v. Peake, 21 Vet. App. 545, 552 (2008); Dickens v. McDonald, 814 F.3d 1359, 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2016). New and Material Evidence The Board determines that an October 2014 rating decision that reopened and denied the claim for service connection for PTSD is the last final rating decision on this matter. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.1103. On review, the Board reopens the service connection claim for PTSD based on subsequent medical evidence indicating that the Veteran has a current diagnosis of PTSD. See September 2017 VA treatment record. This new and material evidence, coupled with the evidence already in the file, raises a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claims. 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(a). REASONS FOR REMAND 1. Entitlement to service connection for PTSD is remanded. Once VA undertakes the effort to provide an examination when developing a claim, even if not statutorily obligated to do so, it must provide an adequate one. See Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 311 (2007). The August 2014 VA examination report indicated that the Veteran did not have a current diagnosis of PTSD. Subsequently, the Veteran was diagnosed with PTSD. See September 2017 VA treatment record. However, the September 2017 VA treatment record does not describe the stressors that support such PTSD diagnosis, and there is no other medical evidence of record that provides such nexus between the diagnosis and the reported stressors. As such, warranted to obtain an adequate medical nexus opinion as to whether the Veteran’s currently diagnosed PTSD is related to or caused by his reported stressors during service. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain another medical opinion from the August 2014 VA examiner, or a suitable substitute, as to the nature and etiology of the Veteran’s diagnosed PTSD. An examination is not required; however, if the VA examiner indicates that s/he cannot adequately respond to the Board’s questions without examination of the Veteran or additional medical evidence, an examination should be afforded to the Veteran. **If an in-person examination is not feasible given the circumstances surrounding the recent pandemic, attempt to obtain the necessary medical information and opinions through other means, such as scheduling the Veteran for a phone call or virtual interview with a VA examiner. After review of the claims file, clarify whether the Veteran’s current PTSD is at least as likely as not (i.e., 50 percent or greater probability) etiologically related to service. **In providing this opinion, the VA examiner must address the Veteran’s statements during the August 2014 VA examination and March 2021 Board hearing (i) that he was exposed to mortars hitting near the trailer area where he lived in Iraq, and (ii) that he heard screams from injured service members in Iraq while waiting to give blood on base. A detailed rationale should be provided for the opinion rendered. If the examiner cannot provide the requested information without resort to speculation, he or she must state the reasons why, and if an additional clinical evaluation is necessary to render the requested information, then that opportunity should be made available. 2. Then, readjudicate the issue on appeal. S. B. MAYS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Thomas, 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.