Citation Nr: 23005442 Decision Date: 01/27/23 Archive Date: 01/27/23 DOCKET NO. 20-21 516 DATE: January 27, 2023 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a psychiatric disability, to include as secondary to service-connected tinnitus, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from January to August 1974 with 15 days lost from June 3 to 17, 1974. See DD214 Certificate of Discharge or Release from Active Duty; see also DD 215, Correction to DD 214, Certificate of Discharge or Release From Active Duty. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on an appeal from a January 2017 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran attended a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) in June 2021and a transcript of the hearing has been associated with the record. This matter was remanded in September 2021 and February 2022 and is now back before the Board for review. Entitlement to service connection for a psychiatric disability, to include as secondary to service-connected tinnitus, is remanded. In the February 2022 remand, the Board directed the RO to obtain an addendum VA medical opinion addressing a series of questions regarding the Veteran's alcohol use disorder. The February 2022 remand explained that a March 2021 psychological evaluation shows that the Veteran reported that he started drinking at age 17 when he joined the military, that a June 2021 letter from Dr. A.M. indicates that the Veteran began drinking alcohol at age 16 and that his drinking "escalated during service," and that an August 2021 medical evaluation also indicated that the Veteran started drinking alcohol at age 16. In February 2022, the RO obtained an addendum medical opinion. However, the February 2022 VA medical opinion is inadequate because it repeatedly indicates that the "[e]xaminer was unable to locate direct evidence of alcohol use disorder prior to service," and did not address the March 2021 psychological evaluation when the Veteran reported that he started drinking at age 17 when he joined the military, June 2021 letter from Dr. A.M., or the August 2021 medical evaluation. As the examiner did not address this relevant evidence, the February 2022 medical opinion is inadequate, and a new opinion is necessary before this matter can be adjudicated. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain an addendum opinion to the November 2021 VA examination from a qualified clinician. The examiner must review the claims file. The examiner must address the March 2021 psychological evaluation, June 2021 letter from Dr. A.M., and the August 2021 medical evaluation in offering the opinions requested below. The examiner is asked to provide a response to the following: a) Did the onset of the Veteran's alcohol use disorder clearly and unmistakably preexist the Veteran's service? b) If the examiner finds that the Veteran's alcohol use disorder did clearly and unmistakably preexist service, was it clearly and unmistakably not aggravated by service? c) If the examiner finds that the Veteran's alcohol use disorder either did not clearly and unmistakably preexist service, or was not clearly and unmistakably aggravated by service, was it is related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, to include stressful training during service? d) If the examiner finds that the Veteran's alcohol use disorder either did not clearly and unmistakably preexist service, or was not clearly and unmistakably aggravated by service, was it caused (in whole or in part) by his service-connected tinnitus? e) If the examiner finds that the Veteran's alcohol use disorder either did not clearly and unmistakably preexist service, or was not clearly and unmistakably aggravated by service, was it aggravated (has undergone a measurable increase in its severity as shown by comparing the current disability to medical evidence created prior to any aggravation) by his service-connected tinnitus. If the Veteran's alcohol use disorder has been aggravated by his service-connected tinnitus, the examiner should also indicate the extent of such aggravation by identifying the baseline level of disability. This may be ascertained by the medical evidence of record and also by the Veteran's statements as to the nature, severity, and frequency of his observable symptoms over time. J. B. FREEMAN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Boal, 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.