Citation Nr: 0000018 Decision Date: 01/03/00 Archive Date: 12/28/01 DOCKET NO. 98-10 883 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Columbia, South Carolina THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder including a posttraumatic stress disorder. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: The American Legion WITNESSES AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant, his wife, and his brother ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD D. Schechter, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from April 1968 to April 1970, from January 1974 to November 1987. The appeal arises from the January 1998 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Columbia, South Carolina, denying service connection for PTSD. REMAND The veteran has submitted statements contending that he experienced multiple stressors in Vietnam, including being subject to mortar fire, and witnessing fellow soldiers and a close friend shot. In a PTSD questionnaire received at the RO in May 1998, the veteran stated that on Thanksgiving Day, 1968, while attached to "Mac-U" in "U-Thinn", during meal time, his unit was attacked with mortar fire, and several soldiers in his unit were hit. He therein also stated that in July 1968 while working with the 196th light infantry in Chi Lye they were attacked by a large force of North Vietnamese regular army. Besides these two stressors, the veteran has also reported suffering mortar attacks in Vietnam on multiple occasions. The veteran's service records reflect that he was part of the Company C 69th Engineering Battalion (Construction) with stationing in USARPAC between July 1969 and April 1970. The veteran's VA medical records, including a VA examination in October 1999, contain diagnoses of PTSD based on reported stressors in service in Vietnam. However, none of the veteran's reported stressors have been verified, and the RO has made no attempt to verify them except to request verification from the veteran himself. The veteran's medals include an Army Commendation Medal and a Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry with Palm, each of which may connote having engaged in combat with the enemy, but neither of which are conclusive of this fact. The Board considers it appropriate to ascertain what actions the above service medals were based on. Additionally, prior to the veteran's discharge from his latter period of service he was given a comprehensive physical and psychiatric evaluation. The clinical record reveals that he was suffering from severe alcohol dependence as well as dementia and pancreatitis associated with alcoholism. However, another psychiatric diagnosis was an adjustment disorder with angry and depressed features manifested by homicidal and suicidal threats, inappropriate anger, and social manifestations and neurovegetative signs compatible with depression. The Board considers it appropriate to ascertain if a chronic acquired psychiatric disorder other than PTSD may have been present during the latter period of service. The claim is considered potentially well grounded at the current time. In view of the foregoing, this claim is REMANDED to the RO for the following development: 1. The RO should appropriately contact the appellant and request that he submit any available evidence of alleged stressors, including combat, he experienced in service, to include a written statement which sets forth the specific dates of events, locations, his unit assignment (down to the company level) and the names and units of any other servicemen involved. He should be informed that such evidence may include any photographs or other documentation that might serve to verify alleged stressors, including combat. He should be advised that information is vitally necessary to obtain supportive evidence of stressful events and that the information about stressors must be as specific as possible because without such details an adequate search for verifying information cannot be conducted. The veteran should also be informed of the probative value of any lay statements from persons with knowledge of the alleged stressful events. The RO should attempt to assist the veteran in obtaining such statements. All records obtained should be associated with the claims file. 2. The RO should also contact the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) and request that the NPRC provide a report as to what the bases were for the veteran's award of an Army Commendation Medal and the award of the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry with Palm. The response should be associated with the claims file. 3. Thereafter, the RO should contact the U.S. Armed Services Center for Research of Unit Records (USASCRUR), located at 7798 Cissna Road, Suite 101, Springfield, VA 22150-3197. USASCRUR should be requested to provide any available information which might corroborate the veteran's alleged stressors. Any USASCRUR report or response obtained should be associated with the claims file. 5. Thereafter, irrespective of whether any alleged stressors have been corroborated, the veteran should be afforded a special VA psychiatric examination to determine the nature of any existing psychiatric disorders. The entire claims folder and a separate copy of this remand should be reviewed by the examiner in connection with the examination. The RO must specify for the examiner whether or not it has determined that the veteran engaged in combat with the enemy. If not, the examiner should be apprised of the stressor or stressors that the RO has determined are established by the record, and the examiner must be instructed that only those events may be considered for the purpose of determining whether exposure to a stressor in service has resulted in PTSD. The examination report should reflect review of pertinent material in the claims folder. If a diagnosis of PTSD is deemed appropriate, the examiner should specify the credible "stressors" that caused the disorder and the evidence relied upon to establish the existence of the stressor(s). The examiner should also be asked to express an opinion as to whether any current acquired psychiatric disorder other than PTSD is related to the adjustment reaction with depressive features diagnosed during the latter period of service in August 1987. 6. Thereafter, the RO should readjudicate the remanded issue. If the determination remains adverse to the veteran, he and his representative should be provided a supplemental statement of the case which includes a summary of additional evidence submitted, applicable laws and regulations, and the reasons for the decision. The veteran and his representative should be afforded the applicable time to respond. The case should be returned to the Board for further appellate review, if in order. The purpose of this remand is to procure clarifying data and to comply with precedent decisions of the Court. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded to the regional office. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment by the RO. The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner. See The Veterans' Benefits Improvements Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-446, § 302, 108 Stat. 4645, 4658 (1994), 38 U.S.C.A. § 5101 (West Supp. 1999) (Historical and Statutory Notes). In addition, VBA's Adjudication Procedure Manual, M21-1, Part IV, directs the ROs to provide expeditious handling of all cases that have been remanded by the Board and the Court. See M21-1, Part IV, paras. 8.44- 8.45 and 38.02-38.03. BRUCE E. HYMAN Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 1991 & Supp. 1999), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (1999).