Citation Nr: 21024009 Decision Date: 04/21/21 Archive Date: 04/21/21 DOCKET NO. 15-23 516 DATE: April 21, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a stomach condition, to include GERD, as secondary to service-connected status post removal neuroma, left groin, previously claimed as nerve entrapment is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include adjustment disorder with anxiety, as secondary to service-connected status post removal neuroma, left groin, previously claimed as nerve entrapment is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from January 1974 to March 1974. These matters come before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from March 2012 and April 2012 rating decisions issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in St. Petersburg, Florida. The Veteran’s claims were previously before the Board in October 2018 and August 2020 when they were remanded for additional evidentiary development. The issues have now returned to the Board for appellate review. Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include adjustment disorder with anxiety, and for a stomach condition, to include GERD, both as secondary to service-connected status post removal neuroma, left groin, previously claimed as nerve entrapment is remanded. Although the Board sincerely regrets the delay, additional development is necessary to secure an additional medical opinion. The Veteran asserts entitlement to service connection for a stomach condition, to include GERD, and entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability, to include adjustment disorder with anxiety. Specifically, the Veteran contends both disabilities are entitled to service connection as secondary to his service-connected status post removal neuroma, left groin, previously claimed as nerve entrapment. See March 2021 Veteran Correspondence; see also February 2011 Statement in Support of Claim. The Board notes that, despite the Veteran contending that his GERD and acquired psychiatric disability are secondary to his service-connected nerve entrapment, the previous Board decisions have framed the issues as secondary to service-connected status-post inguinal hernia repairs. Because of the Board’s incorrect categorization of the Veteran’s claims, the VA medical opinions all opine as to secondary service connection to service-connected status-post inguinal hernia repairs rather than as secondary service connection to service-connected nerve entrapment. Therefore, the Board finds that the Veteran’s claims must be remanded again for addendum medical opinions for entitlement to service connection for a stomach condition, to include GERD, and entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability, to include adjustment disorder with anxiety, both as secondary to service-connected status post removal neuroma, left groin, previously claimed as nerve entrapment. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain an addendum opinion from the appropriate clinician to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran’s stomach condition, to include GERD. The VA examiner must review the claims file and must note review of the file in the report. All necessary tests and studies should be accomplished, and all clinical findings reported in detail. The VA examiner should: (a.) Opine as to whether it is at least likely as not (50 percent probability or more) that the Veteran’s GERD was caused OR aggravated by his service-connected status post removal neuroma, left groin, previously claimed as nerve entrapment. (b.) Opine as to whether it is at least likely as not (50 percent probability or more) that the Veteran’s GERD had its onset during service or is otherwise related to the Veteran’s active service. The clinician must provide separate findings and rationales relating to causation and aggravation. The VA examiner must consider and discuss lay statements from the Veteran. The examiner must obtain a full history from the Veteran. It should be noted that the Veteran is competent to attest to factual matters of which he has first-hand knowledge, including observable symptomatology. If there is a medical basis to support or doubt the history provided by the Veteran, the examiner must provide a fully reasoned explanation. The examiner must provide a rationale in support of all opinions provided. If any opinion cannot be provided without resorting to speculation, the examiner must explain why this is so. 2. Obtain an addendum opinion from the appropriate clinician to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran’s acquired psychiatric disorder, to include adjustment disorder with anxiety. The VA examiner must review the claims file and must note review of the file in the report. All necessary tests and studies should be accomplished, and all clinical findings reported in detail. The VA examiner should: (a.) Opine as to whether it is at least likely as not (50 percent probability or more) that the Veteran’s acquired psychiatric disability was caused OR aggravated by his service-connected status post removal neuroma, left groin, previously claimed as nerve entrapment. (b.) Opine as to whether it is at least likely as not (50 percent probability or more) that the Veteran’s acquired psychiatric disability had its onset during service or is otherwise related to the Veteran’s active service. The clinician must provide separate findings and rationales relating to causation and aggravation. The VA examiner must consider and discuss lay statements from the Veteran. The examiner must obtain a full history from the Veteran. It should be noted that the Veteran is competent to attest to factual matters of which he has first-hand knowledge, including observable symptomatology. If there is a medical basis to support or doubt the history provided by the Veteran, the examiner must provide a fully reasoned explanation. The examiner must provide a rationale in support of all opinions provided. If any opinion cannot be provided without resorting to speculation, the examiner must explain why this is so. 3. Then readjudicate the claims remaining on appeal. If the benefits sought are not granted in full, furnish the Veteran and his representative with a supplemental statement of the case and an opportunity to respond, and return the case to the Board. KRISTI L. GUNN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board A. C. Slaughter, 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.