Citation Nr: 21032001 Decision Date: 05/25/21 Archive Date: 05/25/21 DOCKET NO. 15-00 550A DATE: May 25, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder (initially claimed as posttraumatic stress disorder [PTSD] from the Southwest Asia theater of operations) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from October 1985 to May 1992. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal of a May 25, 2013 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. Relevant to the Veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, such was originally adjudicated by the RO as claims for entitlement to a non-service-connected pension for posttraumatic stress disorder. However, in Clemons v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 1, 5 (2009), the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) held that, in determining the scope of a claim, the Board must consider the claimant's description of the claim; symptoms described; and the information submitted or developed in support of the claim. In light of the Court's decision in Clemons, the Board has recharacterized the issue on appeal as seen on the title page. By way of additional background, the Veteran's claim was previously before the Board on February 28, 2019. On this date, the claim was remanded so that the Veteran could undergo an updated VA psychiatric examination pursuant to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-V). See BVA Remand ( Feb. 28, 2019 ). The examinations were conducted on October 16, 2019, and the Veteran was subsequently issued a Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC) on July 21, 2020. See C&P Exam (Oct. 16, 2019); SSOC (July 21, 2020). The Board determines that despite this most recent VA examination, an additional remand is required to verify some of the Veteran's other contentions as pertaining to his claim; therefore, while the Board sincerely regrets the additional delay that may be caused, another remand is required. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). The Veteran, along with his representative, asserts that he witnessed hostile enemy activity in the Southwest Asia theater of operations during the Persian Gulf War. The Board acknowledges that the Veteran's Form DD-214 contains no conclusive evidence of foreign service. As a result, the Veteran's claim for an acquired psychiatric disorder has been previously denied. The Veteran and his representative specifically assert that the Veteran witnessed hostile activity in Dammam, Saudi Arabia, during his unit's (HHC 1st COSCOM) deployment between approximately August 1990 and June 1991. See VSO IHP ( April 21, 2021 ). This deployment would be after an active duty assignment in Fort Bragg, North Carolina as late as October 1988, but before retirement from active duty. See STR (rec'd Mar. 8, 2012 ), at Page 56. Upon the Board's review of the Veteran's military personnel records, there is evidence that the Veteran was awarded seven "Saudi points" on or about July 1991, see Military Personnel Records ( July 23, 1991 ) (rec'd Dec. 15, 2014), at Page 9. Furthermore, there is also a Desert Shield/Desert Storm Out-processing Checklist that corroborates the Veteran's two deployments to a "Daharan" on October 18, 1990, and on April 17, 1991. See STR ( Apr. 28, 1992 ) (rec'd Mar. 8, 2012), at Page 8. As a result of the above, the Board concludes that the Veteran's foreign service within the Southwest Asia theater of operations during the Persian Gulf War era should be presumed. Therefore, the Veteran's claims are remanded in light of these findings about the Veteran's deployments. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. The Agency of Original Jurisdiction is directed to obtain a unit history of the HHC 1st COSCOM from August 1990 to May 1992. 2. In an effort to verify the Veteran's claimed stressors, the AOJ should then contact the service department and any other official source that could provide verification. The claimed stressors were described in the Veteran's VA Forms 9; 21-4138; and 21-0781aall of which were received on or about January 29, 2015. 3. The Veteran and his representative should be given an opportunity to identify any outstanding private or VA treatment records relevant to the claim on appeal, for service connection for one or more psychiatric disorders, including but not limited to PTSD. After obtaining any necessary authorization from the Veteran, all outstanding records, to include any VA treatment records, should be obtained. For private treatment records, make at least two (2) attempts to obtain records from any identified sources. If any such records are unavailable, inform the Veteran and his representative, and afford them an opportunity to submit any copies in their possession. For federal records, all reasonable attempts should be made to obtain such records. VA medical records as of July 21, 2020 appear to be associated with the claims file, but no subsequent records after that date are of record. If any records cannot be obtained after reasonable efforts have been made, issue a formal determination that such records do not exist or that further efforts to obtain such records would be futile, which should be documented in the claims file. The Veteran must be notified of the attempts made and why further attempts would be futile, and allowed the opportunity to provide such records, as provided in 38 U.S.C. § 5103A(b)(2) and 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(e). 4. Following the receipt of all outstanding records, schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the etiology of his claimed acquired psychiatric disorder. The claims file, including a copy of this remand, must be made available to and reviewed by the examiner. After a review of the record, an examination and interview of the Veteran, the examiner should address each of the following: (a.) Identify all of the Veteran's acquired psychiatric disorders that met the diagnostic criteria. For the purposes of this examination, the examiner should assume that the Veteran's claimed stressors are corroborated as true, including but not limited to missile attacks, wearing gear for chemical warfare, military sexual trauma, and a 2010 (post-service) assault that precipitated the Veteran's initial psychiatric treatment. To the extent that the Veteran does not discuss any of these stressors during the examination, the examiner is asked to review the claims file, to include VA treatment records and the Veteran's stressor statements received on or about January 29, 2015 to obtain details regarding those incidents. (b.) The examiner should specifically indicate whether the Veteran met the diagnostic criteria for PTSD, and, if so, whether such diagnosis was at least as likely as not the result of an in-service stressor, or else whether same is alternatively attributable ot a non-service stressor. (c.) For each diagnosed acquired psychiatric disorder other than PTSD, the examiner should offer an opinion as to whether it was at least as likely as not that any such disorder is related to the Veteran's military service, or else whether same is alternatively attributable to a non-service stressor, to include the 2010 post-service assault. A rationale must be provided for all opinions. As part of this rationale, the examiner should identify and explain the relevance or significance, as appropriate, of any history, clinical findings, medical knowledge or literature, etc., relied upon in reaching the conclusion(s). A discussion of the facts and medical principles involved would be of considerable assistance to the Board. T. SHERRARD Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Michael B. Engle, 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.