Citation Nr: 21028395 Decision Date: 05/11/21 Archive Date: 05/11/21 DOCKET NO. 18-04 835 DATE: May 11, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is granted. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran's GAD first manifested during service and persists to the present date. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to service connection for GAD have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active duty service from November 1972 to September 1973. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2017 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In October 2019, the Board denied entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability. The Veteran appealed that decision to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In a June 2020 Joint Motion for Remand (JMR) the parties agreed that the Board's decision should be vacated. The Court vacated the Board's decision, and remanded the issue to the Board for action consistent with the JMR. The Board notes that the JMR instructed the Board to obtain a medical examination and nexus opinion; however, the Veteran has provided a private examination and opinion, which addresses all issues in the JMR and will result in a grant of benefits. Therefore, the Board will not remand the issue for a duplicative examination. Although the Veteran originally claimed entitlement to service connection for PTSD, the Board notes that the Veteran is not competent to provide a specific diagnosis for his psychiatric symptoms and the claim must encompass his current psychiatric diagnoses. See Clemmons v. West, 206 F.3d 1401, 1403 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (finding that a veteran's claim "cannot be limited only to that diagnosis, but must rather be considered a claim for any mental disability that may be reasonably encompassed.") Entitlement to service connection for GAD. The Veteran contends that he has an acquired psychiatric disability that first manifested during or is causally related to his active service. The Board concludes that the Veteran has a current disability that began during active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1363, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). A February 2021 private examination shows the Veteran has a current diagnosis of GAD. Thus, the question becomes whether the current disability first manifested during service or is related to service. On this question there are probative opinions in favor of and against the claim. The evidence in favor of the claim includes a February 2021 private examination. The examiner, a licensed psychologist, reviewed the Veteran's claims file, interviewed the Veteran on multiple occasions, and performed psychological testing. The examiner opined that the Veteran met the diagnostic criteria for GAD and that it was at least as likely as not that symptoms of the Veteran's GAD were present during service. The examiner also opined that the Veteran's GAD symptoms during service had persisted to the present. The examiner addressed the previous findings of alcoholism, but noted that the alcoholism was a symptom of the Veteran's GAD in the form of self-treatment. He also found that the Veteran's experiences of episodes of depressive mood were a direct response to and features of his chronic, generalized, and high anxiety. He noted research literature clinical assessments indicating that anxious and depressive symptoms often co-exist within the same single psychiatric disorder. The examiner also addressed the Veteran's service treatment records and personnel records, which indicated psychiatric symptoms during service. The examiner acknowledged that the Veteran reported psychiatric symptoms prior to service, but found that the evidence supports that the symptoms are, in his professional opinion, unrelated to his in-service, ongoing, and current psychiatric symptoms, and were fully resolved well prior to the Veteran's enlistment. The Veteran received psychiatric treatment for two years after a pre-service concussion for argumentative and belligerent behavior and insomnia. The entrance examination acknowledged the head injury, but found no psychiatric symptoms or diagnoses. The examiner found that any such symptoms had resolved prior to service. Additionally, the agitated behavior during service at the time of his nervous breakdown had elements, which were clearly unrelated to the post-concussive argumentative and belligerent behavior he had shown for a period of time. The Board notes that the June 2017 VA examination, which provides evidence against the claim, was found to be inadequate by the July 2020 JMR. Therefore, the Board may not rely upon that opinion. Upon review of the record, the Board finds the evidence to at least be in equipoise as to whether the Veteran's current GAD arose in service. Accordingly, after resolving all doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Board finds that service connection for GAD is warranted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. J. NICHOLS Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Patricia Veresink, 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.