Citation Nr: 0003858 Decision Date: 02/15/00 Archive Date: 02/23/00 DOCKET NO. 98-08 174A ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Lincoln, Nebraska THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: John Stevens Berry, Attorney ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD J. D. Parker, Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran (appellant) served on active duty from February 1966 to January 1969. This case previously came to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a decision in January 1998 by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Lincoln, Nebraska, which denied the veteran's claims for service connection for PTSD and a back condition, and an increased (compensable) rating for bilateral hearing loss. In a November 6, 1998 decision, the Board denied the veteran's appeal of all three issues. The veteran then appealed to the United States Court of Veterans Appeals (Court). In a July 1999 joint motion, the parties before the Court (the veteran and the VA Secretary) requested that the Board's November 1998 decision denying service connection for PTSD be vacated and remanded because VA had failed to contact the U.S. Armed Services Center for Research of Unit Records (USASCRUR) in an attempt to verify the veteran's claimed stressors. A July 1999 Court order granted the joint motion; the appeal of the issues of service connection for a back condition and an increased rating for hearing loss were dismissed, and the Board decision was vacated and remanded as to the issue of service connection for PTSD. In light of the July 1999 joint motion and Court order, the only issue remaining on appeal is entitlement to service connection for PTSD. REMAND The July 1999 joint motion and Court order require further development as to the issue of service connection for PTSD. Thus, the case is remanded to the RO for the following action: 1. A summary of the information provided by the veteran concerning the specific circumstances of his claimed stressors while in Vietnam, including the September 1997 VA PTSD examination report, and a copy of the veteran's personnel record should be sent to the U.S. Armed Services Center for Research of Unit Records (USASCRUR) (formerly ESG), 7798 Cissna Road, Springfield, Virginia 22150 for verification of the stressors claimed by the veteran. Any information obtained is to be associated with the claims folder. 2. Following receipt of the USASCRUR's report, and the completion of any additional development warranted or suggested by that office, the RO should prepare a report detailing the nature of any in-service stressful event verified by the USASCRUR. On condition that the development results in confirmation of any of the stressful events reported at the September 1997 VA examination, upon which the diagnosis of PTSD is based, the RO need not have the veteran undergo re- examination by a VA psychiatrist. If no stressor has been verified, the RO should so state in its report. However, if the requested development results in confirmation of a stressor which was not relied on in making a diagnosis of PTSD, then the RO should schedule the veteran for another VA psychiatric or PTSD examination for the purpose of determining whether such stressor(s) alone is sufficient to account for a diagnosis of any ascertained PTSD. In determining whether or not the veteran has PTSD due to an in- service stressor, the examiner is hereby notified that only the verified history detailed in the reports provided by the USASCRUR and/or the RO may be relied upon. If the examiner believes that PTSD is the appropriate diagnosis, she/he must specifically identify which stressor detailed in the USASCRUR's and/or the RO's report is responsible for that conclusion. The report of examination should include a complete rationale for all opinions expressed. The entire claims file and a copy of this REMAND should be made available to and reviewed by the examiner prior to the examination. 3. After undertaking any development deemed necessary in addition to that specified above, the RO should readjudicate the issue of entitlement to service-connection for PTSD. In its readjudication, the RO should apply the relevant provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (d) and (f) (1998), in effect prior to June 18, 1999, and as modified by the new regulation which became effective that date, 38 C.F.R. § 3.304 (1999). See Karnas v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 308, 312-13 (1991) (when a law or regulation changes while a case is pending, the version most favorable to the claimant applies). 4. The veteran has a right to present any additional evidence or argument while the case is in remand status. See Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999); Quarles v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 129, 141 (1992). If the benefit requested on appeal is not granted, the RO should issue a supplemental statement of the case to the veteran and his representative, and a reasonable period of time for a response should be afforded. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board for further appellate review, if otherwise in order. By this REMAND, the Board intimates no opinion as to any final outcome warranted. No action is required of the veteran until he is notified by the RO. R. F. WILLIAMS 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).