BVA9504868 DOCKET NO. 93-08 129 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Albuquerque, New Mexico THE ISSUES 1. Whether new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen a claim for service connection for a hearing loss. 2. Whether new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen a claim for service connection for a generalized anxiety disorder. 3. Entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Nancy R. Kegerreis, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from February 1943 to November 1945. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from November 1991 and December 1992 rating decisions by the Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Albuquerque, New Mexico, which determined that new and material evidence had not been submitted to reopen claims for service connection for a hearing loss and for a generalized anxiety disorder, and denied service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). REMAND The veteran has recently contended, through his representative, that he has PTSD relating to his wartime experiences in World War II. He also claims service connection for a hearing loss and for a generalized anxiety disorder. Unfortunately, the veteran's service medical records are unavailable, presumably having been destroyed in a fire during the early 1970's at the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC). In cases where the veteran's service medical records are unavailable through no fault of the claimant, there is a heightened obligation to assist the claimant in the development of the case. See O'Hare v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 465 (1991); 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a) (1994). Where service medical records are unavailable, the heightened duty to assist includes the obligation to search for alternate methods of proving service connection. See Moore v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 401 (1991). The Board finds the duty to assist particularly compelling in relation to the veteran's PTSD claim. When requested to provide evidence as to a specific traumatic event, including dates, places, and the unit to which he was assigned at the time the incident occurred, the veteran stated that, due to the fact that he was 70 years old, he was unable to remember any exact details about the war. In October 1992, a VA examiner diagnosed the veteran as suffering from PTSD, indicating only that he served in Europe during World War II and was exposed to combat. No specific indicident underlying the diagnosis was provided. However, in January 1993, the veteran recalled that on guard duty at the motor pool in France, the area was bombed by the Germans and that he could hear tanks and enemy troops nearby. A diagnosis of PTSD which is acceptable for VA purposes must be made in accordance with the criteria contained in the American Pyschiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (3rd. ed. revised, 1987) (DSM-III-R), including the identification of a recognizable stressor underlying the diagnosis. Furthermore, in adjudicating a claim for service connection for PTSD, the VA is required to evaluate the evidence supporting a claimed stressor. Once the occurrence of a stressful episode is established, it then must be determined whether the claimed stressful event was of sufficient gravity to support the diagnosis. See generally, Zarycki v. Brown, 6 Vet.App. 91 (1993). The Board finds that the evidence of record is inadequate to resolve the issues on appeal and that further development of the evidence is warranted. The RO should attempt to obtain further information from the veteran as to any further relevant details of his wartime service the occurrence of any claimed stressor(s) experienced by him that he may be able to remember. Moreover, the veteran should be scheduled to undergo further psychiatric evaluation. If, following review of the claims folder, the examiner diagnoses PTSD, the complete rationale for such conclusion, including the identification of the stressor(s) underlying the diagnosis, must be provided. The Board further notes that when a veteran is determined to have "engaged in combat" with the enemy, and the purported stressor is combat-related, verification of the occurrence of the claimed stressor is not required. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f) (1994); Zarycki, 6 Vet.App. at 93. The Board notes from the veteran's DD 214 that he was in a combat zone. It is not clear from the claims file, however, whether he was "engaged in combat," and the RO has made no finding in this regard. Clearly, additional information, including procurement and review of the veteran's military service personnel folder, is needed to determine the veteran's role during World War II in Europe. Moreover, in the event that, following review of the such evidence, the RO finds that the veteran did not engage in combat with the enemy during service, verification of the occurence of the claimed stressor(s) from the United States Army and Joint Services Environmental Support Group (ESG) will be required. In view of the foregoing, this case is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. The veteran should be contacted to determine whether he remembers any additional information pertaining to his claimed stressor and as to any actual combat experiences that he may have had. The veteran should also be requested to provide information regarding his duties during service, particularly those, if any, related to combat. 2. The RO should request from the United States Army, the National Personnel Records Center, and any other appropriate source, any available personnel records pertaining to the veteran's military service. All such records received should be associated with the veteran's claims file. 3. If, on the basis of the information obtained from the foregoing requests, the RO determines that the veteran did not engage in combat with the enemy, an attempt to verify the occurrence of his purported stressors with ESG must be made. 4. After the above development has been accomplished, the veteran should be afforded a comprehensive psychiatric evaluation to determine the nature and severity of the veteran's psychiatric disorder(s). The examination must be conducted in conformity with Chapters 14 and 20 of the VA Physician's Guide for Disability Evaluation Examinations (1985), and the examiner should provide a multiaxial evaluation pursuant to the DSM- III-R. The examiner specifically is is requested to provide the complete rationale for any diagnosis rendered (to include, in the event of a diagnosis of PTSD, identification of the stressor(s) deemed to be underlying the diagnosis, along with the other criteria relative to a PTSD diagnosis set forth in the DSM-III-R), and the symptomatology attributable to each disorder diagnosed. The veteran's claims file, must be made available to the examiner for a complete study of the case prior to, and during, the evaluation. When the requested development has been completed, the case should again be reviewed by the RO. Unless the veteran is satisfied with any favorable outcome and withdraws his appeal, the case should then be returned to the Board after compliance with the provisions for processing appeals, including the issuance of a supplemental statement of the case and provision of the applicable time period for response thereto. The Board's full consideration of all issues on appeal is held in abeyance pending completion of the above-requested actions. By its REMAND, the Board intimates no opinion as to the ultimate disposition of the case, either favorable or unfavorable, at this time. No action is required of the veteran until he is notified. JACQUELINE E. MONROE 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).