BVA9505101 DOCKET NO. 93-08 363 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Manchester, New Hampshire THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: New Hampshire State Veterans Council ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Rebecca A. Kelly, Associate Counsel REMAND The veteran served on active duty from October 1983 to February 1990. This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (the Board) on appeal from a decision in October 1991 by the Manchester, New Hampshire, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), Regional Office (RO). The RO confirmed and continued the denial of benefits sought in April 1992 and again in December 1992. The veteran contends that entitlement to service-connection for an acquired psychiatric disability is warranted. He argues that he had been a good soldier throughout the first six years of his military career and that the first signs of any psychiatric problems occurred after he had been transferred to Fort Bragg and experienced a personality clash with his supervisor. The veteran's representative contends that the veteran has not been afforded his full due process rights because of the circumstances surrounding the veteran's military records at the time of the RO's decision. He argues that the veteran has diligently pursued a plan for his personal rehabilitation. He argues that the veteran's outpatient treatment records from April 1989 through September 1990 clearly show the veteran to have had a severe mental state. In reviewing the record, the undersigned was cognizant of the duty of the VA to assist the veteran in the development of all facts pertinent to his claim. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. § 3.103(a) (1993). This includes the duty to obtain VA examinations which are an adequate basis upon which to determine entitlement to the benefit sought, as well as the duty to obtain all relevant records to which the veteran has referred. Littke v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 90 (1991). Before the Board can render an opinion on the issue of whether an increased evaluation is warranted, the RO must fully develop the record. Under the circumstances of this case, it is the opinion of the undersigned that additional assistance is necessary, and this case is REMANDED to the RO for the following: 1. The RO must elicit from the veteran the names, locations and dates of treatment received after his discharge, by private physicians or facilities for treatment of a psychiatric condition or for any rehabilitation or vocational counseling from February 1990 to the present; After obtaining authorizations for release of records, the RO must request records from all providers named by the veteran. Any records obtained should be associated with the record. 2. The RO must specifically request that the veteran submit the name and location of the doctor who treated him from April 1989 through September 1990 for a psychiatric condition and then as above, request that copies of the authorized records to be sent. Any indicated records obtained should be associated with the record. 3. The RO must obtain the veteran's authorization to obtain all treatment records from Dr. Maria C. Gaticales for psychiatric treatment from January 1992 to the present. Any indicated records should be requested and associated with the record. 4. The RO should next schedule the veteran for a comprehensive VA psychiatric examination. This examination must be conducted in accordance with the VA Physician's Guide for Disability Evaluation Examinations. All indicated tests, including appropriate psychological studies with applicable subscales should be conducted. A multiaxial evaluation is requested. The claims file must be made available to and reviewed by the examiner prior to the requested examination. After the examiner reviews the veteran's entire medical history and completes a full psychiatric evaluation, an opinion must be rendered as to whether the psychiatric symptoms diagnosed during active duty as a personality disorder were early manifestations of his current psychiatric diagnosis. The rationale for the opinion expressed would be helpful in the adjudication of the claim. In the event that the veteran's claim remains denied, in whole or in part, he and his representative should be provided with an appropriate supplemental statement of the case, and an opportunity to respond, and the case should be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration if otherwise in order. KENNETH R. ANDREWS, JR. 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) (1994).