Citation Nr: 22016202 Decision Date: 03/21/22 Archive Date: 03/21/22 DOCKET NO. 16-58 208 DATE: March 21, 2022 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a back disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran was a member of the Alabama Army National Guard with a period of initial active duty for training (ACDUTRA) from July 1984 to November 1984. These matters come to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2014 rating decision by the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) of the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The Board notes that the Veteran requested a Board hearing in his November 2016 VA Form 9. However, he withdrew this request in correspondence received in January 2022. As such the hearing request is withdrawn. See 38 C.F.R. § 20.603. With respect to psychiatric disorders, a claim of service connection encompasses all pertinent symptomatology, regardless of how that symptomatology is diagnosed. See Clemons v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 1, 5, 9 (2009). The Board has recharacterized the issue as a claim of entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder. The duty to assist requires provision of an examination when there is a current disability, an injury in service, and a possible nexus between them. 38 U.S.C. § 5103A(d); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(4); McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). In his November 2016 VA Form 9, the Veteran reported that he received treatment for mental health issues during advanced individual training (AIT) at Fort Jackson, South Carolina. Thereafter, he stated that he was also treated for his mental health while on active duty in the National Guard while stationed in Frankfurt, Germany. For purposes of determining the necessity of an examination, the assertions of treatment are accepted as true. Service treatment records document complaints of lower back pain. Post-service treatment records document diagnoses of degenerative changes of the lumbar spine, schizophrenia, anxiety, and depression. The Veteran has presented sufficient evidence to raise the possibility of nexuses regarding his claims of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder and a back disability. Therefore, VA examinations for the Veteran's claimed disabilities are warranted. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Contact the Veteran and request properly executed releases for any private care providers who have treated him for an acquired psychiatric disorder and/or back disability. Upon receipt of such, VA must take appropriate action to contact the identified providers and request complete treatment records. The Veteran should be informed that in the alternative he may obtain and submit the records himself. 2. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to ascertain the nature and etiology of the claimed acquired psychiatric disorder; the claims folder must be reviewed in conjunction with the examination. The examiner must identify any current disabilities. For each diagnosed disability, the examiner must opine as to whether such is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) caused or aggravated by service. A full and complete rationale is required for all opinions expressed. Lay statements regarding onset and treatment must be addressed. 3. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to ascertain the nature and etiology of the claimed back disability; the claims folder must be reviewed in conjunction with the examination. The examiner must identify any current disabilities. For each diagnosed disability, the examiner must opine as to whether such is at least as likely as not caused or aggravated by service. A full and complete rationale is required for all opinions expressed. Lay statements regarding onset and treatment must be addressed. 4. Then, readjudicate the remanded issues. If the benefits sought remains denied, issue a supplemental statement of the case. The case should then be returned to the Board for appellate review if otherwise in order. WILLIAM H. DONNELLY Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board G.A. Ong, 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.