Citation Nr: 21040996
Decision Date: 07/07/21	Archive Date: 07/07/21

DOCKET NO. 18-54 963
DATE: July 7, 2021

REMANDED

The appeal for entitlement to service connection for obstructive sleep apnea, to include as secondary to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or diabetes mellitus is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The veteran served on active duty from January 1970 to February 1974.  

This appeal originated with Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) decisions of August 2015 and January 2016.  It was previously before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) in March 2020.  The veteran appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court).  In January 2021, the Court endorsed a Joint Motion for Remand filed by both parties to the case, vacated the Board's decision and remanded for further evidentiary development.

The veteran is seeking service connection for obstructive sleep apnea.  He contends that apnea is secondary to or aggravated by his service-connected PTSD or by his service-connected diabetes mellitus.  

In the Joint Motion for Remand, the parties agreed that the VA has not obtained adequate medical opinion pertaining to the question of whether the veteran's PTSD and/or his diabetes mellitus aggravated his sleep apnea.  Therefore, the Board finds that remand is warranted for a VA medical opinion to address these questions. 

As the veteran continues to receive VA medical care, his VA medical records should be updated for the file.

The matter is REMANDED for the following actions:

1.  Obtain the Veteran's VA treatment records for the period from August 2019 to the Present.

2.  Following the development above, obtain a VA addendum opinion from an appropriate examiner regarding whether the Veteran's sleep apnea is more, less, or equally likely proximately due to service-connected PTSD and/or diabetes mellitus, or aggravated beyond its natural progression by service-connected PTSD and/or diabetes mellitus.  All reasonable relationships among these diseases should be explored, and the complete rationale for all opinions expressed should be fully explained.

IF the reviewer deems that additional tests or studies and/or a clinical examination would be helpful to reaching a fully informed opinion, then such testing and/or examination should be scheduled.  

 

 

PAUL E. METZNER

Acting Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Heather J. Harter, 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.