Citation Nr: 21023810 Decision Date: 04/21/21 Archive Date: 04/21/21 DOCKET NO. 16-31 372 DATE: April 21, 2021 REMANDED Service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The appellant is a Veteran who served on active duty from October 1975 to July 1979. This appeal is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2012 rating decision appealed in a timely July 2012 notice of disagreement (NOD) and perfected by a timely June 2016 substantive appeal in response to statement of the case (SOC) earlier that month. In June 2019, a hearing was held before the undersigned; a transcript is of record. The Board remanded this matter in July 2019. The Board has recharacterized the issue on appeal in light of evidence suggesting multiple psychiatric diagnoses. See Clemons v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 1, 5-6 (2009). 1. Service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability is remanded. The prior remand explicitly ordered a VA examination and medical opinion considering the significance of competent lay reports and sworn testimony indicating traumatic experiences in service, including “physical and emotional abuse from a drill instructor during boot camp, ‘code reds’ (e.g., unsanctioned extrajudicial harassment or punishment), and threats of harm or death to deter him from reporting this abuse,” as well as other factors such as “statements regarding his behavioral changes and mental state, and service records indicating he was subject to disciplinary action during service and requested to be transferred from his duty station.” The negative February 2020 opinion obtained on remand does none of these things and rests entirely on the examiner’s finding that the Veteran reported onset of symptoms in 2010 (though it is unclear whether the Veteran actually said this, because the only relevant historical notation in the report indicates he reported first seeking treatment in 2010). Corrective action is required to ensure compliance with the prior remand. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain all updated records (i.e., those not already of record) of VA and adequately identified private treatment the Veteran has received for the disabilities remaining on appeal. 2. Schedule the Veteran for an in-person or telehealth (whichever is appropriate) examination by a psychiatrist, psychologist, or other appropriate clinician to determine the nature and cause of any psychiatric disability found. Based on a review of the record, examination of the Veteran (INCLUDING A COMPLETE SUBJECTIVE HISTORY AND REPORT DESCRIBING ONSET, COURSE, AND PROGRESSION OF HIS SYMPTOMS), and any tests or studies deemed necessary, the examiner must respond to the following: (a.) Please diagnose all psychiatric disability entities found. All diagnostic findings (or lack thereof) must be reconciled with conflicting evidence in the record. If any previously documented diagnoses are no longer or otherwise not felt to apply, the examiner must explain why, citing to the pertinent diagnostic criteria. (b.) For each disability diagnosed, please opine as to whether it is AT LEAST AS LIKELY AS NOT (A 50 PERCENT PROBABILITY OR GREATER) that such disability is related to the Veteran’s military service, TO SPECIFICALLY INCLUDE his competent reports of traumas therein and other associated or relevant evidence—e.g., physical and emotional abuse from a drill instructor during boot camp, “code reds” (i.e., unsanctioned extrajudicial harassment or punishment), threats of harm or death to deter him from reporting this abuse, statements regarding his behavioral changes and mental state, and service records indicating he was subject to disciplinary action during service and requested to be transferred from his duty station. All opinions must include a detailed rationale. Providing an opinion or conclusion without enough explanation will delay processing of the claim and require further clarification. VICTORIA MOSHIASHWILI Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Yuan, 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.