BVA9500786 DOCKET NO. 93-08 528 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Milwaukee, Wisconsin THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD A. D. Jackson, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran had active service from September 1967 until April 1969. This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a rating decision of November 1991 from the Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Regional Office (RO) which denied service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder. REMAND The veteran contends that he is entitled to service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder. He claims that the RO did not take into account or properly weigh the evidence of record, including the service medical records, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) treatment records, and other evidence submitted by the veteran in support of his claim. The veteran maintains that while stationed in Vietnam he participated in numerous combat activities. He asserts that he was subjected to enemy rocket attacks and witnessed the death and wounding of many comrades. He argues that his experiences in Vietnam have caused him great stress and have resulted in his current psychiatric problems. After a review of the record, it is found that further development is warranted. It is noted that the veteran was assigned a provisional diagnosis of post-traumatic stress in June 1991. Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA) clinical records have reflected this diagnosis since that time. However, it appears that the examiners have not had the benefit of the veteran's prior service or medical history before them. The VA examiner at the December 1992 compensation examination noted that the veteran's claims folder was not available. Service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder requires a clear diagnosis of the condition. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (f)(1993). In order to make an equitable determination as to the issue at hand, an examination by a Board of two psychiatrists would be helpful. It is also noted, in an attempt to verify asserted stressors, the RO requested information from the U. S. Army and Joint Services Environmental Support Group (ESG). The resulting report generally verified some events described by the appellant, but not all of the information related to the alleged combat experiences, and stated that in order to thoroughly research the stressors, more specific information would be required of the appellant. This information was never requested from the veteran. To ensure that the VA has met its duty to assist the claimant in developing the facts pertinent to the claim and to ensure full compliance with due process requirements, the case is REMANDED to the RO for the following development: 1. The veteran should be contacted through his representative and asked to furnish more detailed information as to his activities during active military service, particularly in regards to names of comrades wounded or killed in action, specific dates in which the casualties occurred, and detailed descriptions of events. In this regard, attention is directed to the letter from the ESG in February 1992, in which it was emphasized that, in order to conduct meaningful research, the veteran must provide the "who, what, where and when" of each stressor. If such information is forthcoming from the veteran, attention is also directed to information provided by the ESG with regard to obtaining unit morning reports, if such records would be deemed helpful in corroborating/assessing information provided by the veteran. 2. The RO should schedule the veteran for a psychiatric examination by a Board of two psychiatrists to determine the nature of his psychiatric impairment. Psychological testing is also to be accomplished. More specifically, the Board wishes to determine if he has post-traumatic stress disorder, as defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM-III-R). If so, the specific symptoms which establish this particular diagnosis and exclude other diagnoses should be itemized in detail. The precipitating stressors should be fully identified. The claims folder should be made available to the examining physicians for review prior to conducting the requested examination. 3. After the development requested above has been completed to the extent possible, the RO should again review the record. If any benefit sought on appeal remains denied, the appellant and representative should be furnished a supplemental statement of the case and given the opportunity to respond thereto. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board, if in order. The Board intimates no opinion as to the ultimate outcome of this case. The appellant need take no action unless otherwise notified. JEFFREY J. MARTIN Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals The Board of Veterans' Appeals Administrative Procedures Improvement Act, Pub. L. No. 103-271, § 6, 108 Stat. 740, ___ (1994), permits a proceeding instituted before the Board to be assigned to an individual member of the Board for a determination. This proceeding has been assigned to an individual member of the Board. Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 1991), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Veterans Appeals. 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) (1993).