Citation Nr: 0809802 Decision Date: 03/25/08 Archive Date: 04/09/08 DOCKET NO. 06-07 774 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Houston, Texas THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for bipolar mood disorder. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD David Ganz, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran had active military service from June 1967 to November 1989. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a May 2003 rating decision of the Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Houston, Texas, which denied entitlement to service connection for bipolar mood disorder (claimed as depression, anxiety, marital, legal, and bipolar). The veteran requested a hearing before a Veteran's Law Judge at the RO, which was scheduled for November 8, 2007. He withdrew his request in a timely manner. The issue has been recharacterized on the title page to comport with the medical evidence of record. The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the appellant if further action is required. REMAND The veteran seeks service connection for bipolar mood disorder. He claims that he began treatment for bipolar symptoms while in active service, and continued treatment following retirement in November 1989. In order to establish service connection for a claimed disability, there must be (1) medical evidence of a current disability; (2) medical, or in certain circumstances, lay evidence of in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) medical evidence of a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the current disability. See Hickson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 247, 253 (1999). The medical evidence of record indicates a current bipolar mood disorder and medical evidence of a nexus between an in- service disease or injury and the current disability, however there is no credible evidence of an in-service injury or disease. The veteran noted that that he began treatment for bipolar symptoms at the psychological department of Darnell Army Hospital in Fort Hood, Texas, in April 1984, and that he continued treatment with a psychiatrist in the psychological department of the Nuremberg Hospital in Nuremberg, Germany in July 1988. The veteran also indicated that upon retirement in November 1989 he continued psychological treatment in the civilian sector. Although the RO has obtained the veteran's service medical records (SMRs), it has not attempted to obtain psychiatric treatment records from Darnell Army Hospital in Fort Hood, Texas, for the period of April 1984, or from Nuremberg Hospital in Nuremberg, Germany, for the period of July 1988. Likewise, the RO has not attempted to obtain the veteran's personnel records, which may show notations relating to a possible mental disorder the veteran may have had while in- service. To ensure that VA has met its duty to assist the appellant in developing the evidence in support of his claim pursuant to 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A, and to ensure full compliance with due process requirements, this case must be remanded so that the RO can obtain these records. Additionally, this claim must be remanded for a second reason. In May 2003, the RO denied the benefits sought on appeal. The veteran perfected his appeal and his claim was certified to the Board in August 2006. In December 2007 the Board received an additional medical opinion from the veteran's psychiatrist in support of the veteran's claim. This evidence is potentially relevant to the veteran's claim and has not been considered by the RO. Applicable VA regulations require that pertinent evidence submitted by the appellant must be referred to the agency of original jurisdiction for review and preparation of a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) unless this procedural right is waived in writing by the appellant. See Disabled American Veterans v. Sec'y of Veterans Affairs, 327 F.3d 1339, 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2003); 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.37, 20.1304(c) (2007). As the veteran has specifically not waived initial RO consideration of this evidence, a remand to the RO is necessary. 38 C.F.R. § 19.9 (2007). Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain psychiatric treatment records from Darnell Army Hospital in Fort Hood, Texas, including specifically for the period of April 1984, and from Nuremberg Hospital in Nuremberg, Germany, including specifically for the period of July 1988. Note any negative responses received following the making of these requests. 2. Obtain the veteran's entire personnel file, to include, any administrative remarks, copies of orders, citations, and legal proceedings. Note any negative responses received following the making of these requests. 3. Ask the veteran for specific dates, treatment locations, and treating clinician names for any post-service psychiatric or other mental health treatment he received. The RO should then take all necessary steps to obtain these treatment records. 4. Thereafter, if necessary, any additional development deemed appropriate should be accomplished. The claim should then be readjudicated. If the claim remains denied, the RO should issue a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) containing notice of all relevant actions taken on the claim, to include a summary of the evidence and applicable law and regulations considered pertinent to the issue currently on appeal and allow an appropriate period of time for response. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. 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 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2007). _________________________________________________ RONALD W. SCHOLZ Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), 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) (2007).