Citation Nr: 21025863 Decision Date: 04/29/21 Archive Date: 04/29/21 DOCKET NO. 18-51 599 DATE: April 29, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active military service from July 1977 to July 1980 and from December 2004 to December 2005 and from January 2006 to June 2006 and from January 2008 to April 2008 and from January 2011 to June 2011 and from August 2013 to March 2014. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2017 rating decision of a VA Regional Office (RO). The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge at a July 2020 hearing before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board). The Veteran asserts that he has depression as a result of his active service. Pursuant to Clemons v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 1 (2009), the Board has recharacterized the Veteran’s claims to include any psychiatric disorder. As emphasized in Clemons, though a Veteran may only seek service connection for one psychiatric disorder, the claim cannot be limited only to that diagnosis but must rather be considered a claim for any mental disability that may be reasonably encompassed. During the Veteran’s July 2020 Board hearing, he testified that he experienced chronic depression since leaving active service due to in-service events. In a medical opinion by two private psychologists, the physicians found that the Veteran met the criteria for a diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder. The Veteran has not been afforded a VA examination on the nature and etiology of his claimed condition. Such is needed in this case. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Send the Veteran a letter (i.e., stressor verification form) requesting any pertinent information to assist VA in attempting to verify any in-service stressors. Following receipt of any response, appropriate action should be taken to attempt to verify any reported stressors that are capable of verification, to include contacting the Joint Services Records Research Center (JSRRC) and any other appropriate sources. If the search for corroborating records leads to negative results, the RO must notify the Veteran and his representative of this fact, explaining the efforts taken, describing any further action to be taken, and affording them the opportunity to respond. The RO should also follow up on any additional action suggested by each appropriate source contacted. Consideration should be given to the July 2020 hearing testimony, December 2020 medical opinion, and lay statements of record. 2. After all development has been undertaken, schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the etiology of all psychiatric disorders, to include PTSD, if present. The entire claims file, including a copy of this remand, must be made available to and be reviewed by the examiner. Any indicated tests and studies must be accomplished, and all clinical findings must be reported in detail and correlated to a specific diagnosis. An explanation for all opinions expressed must be provided. The examiner is asked to opine on the following matters: (a) Identify all psychiatric disorders present during the pendency of the appeal. (b) For each non-PTSD psychiatric disorder diagnosed, provide an opinion regarding whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent or greater probability) that each disorder had its onset in, or is otherwise related to, active service. (c) If stressor verification is accomplished and a diagnosis of PTSD is deemed appropriate, the examiner should also opine as to whether any of the identified stressor(s) are adequate to support the diagnosis. All opinions must be supported by a rationale. The Board recognizes the practical difficulties of scheduling an examination in view of the COVID-19 epidemic, and requests flexibility and understanding in affording the Veteran an opportunity to report for an examination. A. C. MACKENZIE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board E. Hicks, 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.