Citation Nr: 22012230 Decision Date: 03/03/22 Archive Date: 03/02/22 DOCKET NO. 18-09 732 DATE: March 3, 2022 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for temporomandibular articulation (TMJ) is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for hand and/or finger condition is remanded. Entitlement to total disability rating due to individual unemployability (TDIU) is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for pes planus is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for mental health disorder is remanded. Entitlement to nonservice connection pension benefits is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from April 2002 to February 2003. 1. Entitlement to service connection for TMJ 2. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss 3. Entitlement to service connection for hand and/or finger condition 4. Entitlement to service connection for pes planus 5. Entitlement to service connection for mental health disorder 6. Entitlement to nonservice connection pension benefits VA has a duty to make reasonable efforts to assist Veterans in securing evidence necessary to substantiate their claim. 38 U.S.C. § 5103A (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c) (2017). Review of the record reveals that there may be outstanding relevant service treatment records and medical treatment records. The Veteran was incarcerated for part of the appeal period and reported treatment at the Cleveland VA medical center (VAMC) from 2014 to present; however, there are only limited medical prison records and no records from Clevand VAMC associated with the file. Additionally, the Veteran's service treatment records are incomplete as noted by an April 2015 correspondence. See Email Correspondence April 2015. Federal records, such as VA treatment and service treatment records are within VA's constructive possession, and are considered potentially relevant to the issues on appeal. Therefore, as the outstanding medical treatment and service treatment records are potentially relevant to the pending claims for entitlement to service connection and nonservice connected pension benefits a remand is required to allow VA to obtain the outstanding records. 7. Entitlement to TDIU The Veteran's claim for entitlement to a TDIU is inextricably intertwined with the service connection claims on appeal. Therefore, the Board finds that the claim for a TDIU must be remanded as well. See Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180 (1991) (issues are inextricably intertwined when a decision on one issue would have a significant impact on another issue). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. In remanding this case, the Board makes no credibility determination, expressed or implied, at this juncture. 2. Acquire the Veteran's complete service personnel records. All attempts to secure this evidence must be documented in the claims file. Requests for the records must continue until it is reasonably certain that further attempts would be futile. If the records are unavailable, the Agency of Original Jurisdiction should associate a memorandum of unavailability with the claims file and notify the Veteran and his representative pursuant to the procedures outlined in 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(e). 3. Obtain outstanding prison medical records as well as any records from private treatment providers identified by the Veteran. Request the Veteran complete a medical authorization to allow VA to obtain all outstanding medical records. If, after making reasonable efforts, the records cannot be obtained, notify the Veteran and his representative and (a) identify the specific records that cannot be obtained; (b) briefly explain the efforts made to obtain those records; and (c) describe any further action to be taken with respect to the claim. The Veteran must then be given an opportunity to respond. Requests for the records must continue until it is reasonably certain that further attempts would be futile. If the records are unavailable, the Agency of Original Jurisdiction should associate a memorandum of unavailability with the claims file and notify the Veteran and his representative pursuant to the procedures outlined in 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(e). 4. After the above development is completed, obtain an addendum medical opinion from a medical professional with appropriate expertise to determine the nature and etiology of any current psychiatric disorder. If the examiner determines that an opinion cannot be provided without an examination, the Veteran should be scheduled for one. The examiner should review the Veteran's claims file and address the following: (a.) List all psychiatric conditions present during the time period of the claim. (b.) For each psychiatric condition, is there clear and unmistakable (obvious or manifest) evidence that demonstrates that the Veteran's current psychiatric condition existed prior to his active duty military service? (c.) If so, is it clear and unmistakable that the preexisting psychiatric condition was not aggravated (i.e., permanently worsened) either because there was no increase in disability during service or because any increase in disability was due to the natural progress of the preexisting condition? (d.) If any psychiatric condition did not clearly and unmistakably preexist service, is it at least as likely as not (a 50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran's psychiatric condition is related to active service or is caused by or aggravated by military service? If PTSD is diagnosed, the specific stressors giving rise to the condition must be identified. A complete rationale for all medical opinions is required. 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). If the medical professional cannot provide an opinion without resorting to mere speculation, he or she shall provide a complete explanation for why an opinion cannot be rendered. In so doing, the medical professional shall explain whether the inability to provide a more definitive opinion is the result of a need for additional information, or that he or she has exhausted the limits of current medical knowledge in providing an answer to that particular question(s). 5. Upon completion of the above directives, complete any other necessary development after review of any additionally received records, to include additional VA examinations if warranted. G. A. WASIK Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board S. A. Prinsen 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.