Citation Nr: 21028489 Decision Date: 05/11/21 Archive Date: 05/11/21 DOCKET NO. 13-25 345A DATE: May 11, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), major depressive disorder, unspecified anxiety disorder and poly substance dependence is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from August 1980 to August 1984. She also has subsequent reserve service. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a September 2012 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In July 2017, the Veteran testified at a Board video conference hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of this hearing is of record. This matter was last before the Board in December 2019, when it was remanded for further development 1. Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD, major depressive disorder, unspecified anxiety disorder and poly substance dependence The Veteran asserts that her psychological conditions are related to service. Specifically, she contends that while in the military, she became pregnant by her sergeant who was married. The sergeant forced her to get an abortion at age 19. She further reports that she was very sad and depressed about this and turned to drug abuse afterward. The RO has conceded military sexual trauma. In September 2019, the VA examiner opined that the claim condition was less likely than not incurred in or caused by the claimed in-service injury, event or illness. The examiner notes that the Veteran endorses symptoms that are consistent with the criteria for a diagnosis of stimulant use disorder, currently in full remission and unspecified depressive disorder. The examiner indicated that the Veteran's depressive disorder was caused by decades of chronic substance abuse. In accordance with the December 2019 remand directives, an addendum opinion was obtained. Nevertheless, that opinion is not fully responsive to the remand directives. Although the examiner opined the conditions were less likely than not related to the service, the examiner did not provide an adequate rationale. Additionally, the examiner failed to address the Veteran's anxiety disorder, stating that he did not diagnose it. The Board regrets the additional delay but finds that a remand is warranted for substantial compliance with its prior remand. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Send the claims file to an appropriate VA examiner to obtain an addendum opinion on the claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder. If a new examination is deemed necessary to respond to the question presented, one should be scheduled. Following review of the claims file, the clinician should opine: (a.) For documented diagnoses of bipolar disorder, unspecified depressive disorder, depression not otherwise specified, dysthymia, major depressive episode, and unspecified anxiety disorder the clinician should state whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or more) that the diagnosed acquired psychiatric disorders were incurred during or otherwise related to the Veteran's military service. If the clinician finds that any of the above diagnoses that are documented in the Veteran's VA treatment records have not been present during the appeal period, a full explanation should be provided. (b.) If and only if the clinician finds that the Veteran has a psychiatric diagnosis incurred in or otherwise related to service, the clinician should state whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or more) that the Veteran's poly substance abuse and/or dependence was caused or aggravated (worsened) by the psychiatric diagnosis. If the clinician finds that the Veteran's poly substance abuse and/or dependence was aggravated by any psychiatric disorder that was incurred in or otherwise related to service, the clinician should attempt to quantify the level of aggravation beyond the baseline level of the poly substance abuse and/or dependence. A complete rationale should be provided for all opinions and conclusions expressed. K. A. BANFIELD Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Asare, 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.