Citation Nr: 0812241 Decision Date: 04/14/08 Archive Date: 05/01/08 DOCKET NO. 04-40 356 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Phoenix, Arizona THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Vietnam Veterans of America WITNESSES AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant and Witness ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD D. Johnson, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from January 1967 to June 1970. The veteran had Vietnam service from October 21, 1969 to June 21, 1970. This case comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2003 decision rendered by the Phoenix, Arizona Regional Office (RO) of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), which denied a claim of service connection for PTSD. The veteran presented testimony at RO hearings held in January 2003 and November 2004. The veteran also testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge at a Travel Board hearing in January 2008. Transcripts from these hearings are 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 contends that he has PTSD as a result of traumatic events that occurred while he was on active service with the United States Army in the Republic of Vietnam. Official records show that he was in Vietnam from October 21, 1969 to June 21, 1970 and assigned to the Headquarters and Headquarters Company (HHC), 1st Signal Brigade. His military occupational specialty (MOS) is listed as 71B30 clerk typist. The veteran claims that he was later reassigned as a truck driver and also had to perform perimeter guard duty. The veteran alleges that as a truck driver he was required to transport Vietnamese civilian employees from their homes to their jobs on the military base. He has testified that he was sent outside the perimeter alone every day, with only an M-16 rifle for protection. The veteran alleges that performing such duties on a daily basis made him very fearful of ambush attacks and bombs; and caused him to use alcohol and drugs to overcome his fear and apprehension. The veteran has reported to medical personnel that while on perimeter guard duty one night, his base came under mortar/rocket and small arms fire. He claims that the firefight lasted three hours and a mortar round made a direct hit on the Unit Administration's bunker. He is unaware of any casualties. The veteran also alleges that he was a patient at the 90th Medevac Hospital on two separate occasions while in Vietnam. In recent written statements, though he has indicated that the facility is in fact the 93rd Medevac Hospital. The veteran claims that each time he was hospitalized for a week and was exposed to wounded soldiers crying and screaming in pain. It was also asserted that being in close proximity to people who expire (in this case, soldiers in the hospital beds near the veteran) had a uniquely stressful impact on the veteran, as a Navajo. See page 9, transcript of January 2008 hearing, particularly statements from the veteran's witness, CJ, regarding Navajo cultural tradition. The claims file shows diagnoses and treatment for PTSD and depression. A March 2003 VA examination disputes the diagnosis of PTSD. The Board observes that a request has not been made to the United States Army and Joint Services Records Research Center (JSRRC) to assist in verifying the reported in-service stressors including: the veteran's actual duties while in Vietnam; any periods of hospitalization at the 93rd Medevac Hospital; and a mortar/rocket attack on his base camp. Given the above stressor statements, and the veteran's verified service in-country, VA should request credible supporting evidence from the JSRRC and ask them to attempt to verify the stressors. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A(b) (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c) (2007). In addition to the lack of a verified in-service stressor event, there is some conflict as to whether or not the veteran has a confirmed diagnosis of PTSD. If a stressor is verified, the veteran should be sent for a new examination to determine whether he has met the criteria for a diagnosis of PTSD due to a verified in-service stressor. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The veteran should be provided one last opportunity to itemize and provide specific information regarding the stressor event(s) he alleges occurred in service. He should be asked to identify specific dates (within a 60 day period), locations and any additional unit numbers to which he may have been assigned. 2. With any additional information provided by the veteran, and with the evidence already of record, the AMC/RO must prepare a summary of the veteran's alleged service stressors. This summary must be prepared regardless whether the veteran provides an additional statement, as requested above. This summary and a copy of the veteran's DD 214 and other service personnel records should be sent to the U. S. Army and Joint Services Records Research Center (JSRRC). 3. If, and only if, a claimed stressor event is found to be reasonably corroborated by credible supporting evidence, the veteran should undergo a VA psychiatric examination to clarify whether he has PTSD related to documented stressors during service. The AMC/RO must specify for the psychiatrist the stressor or stressors which it has determined that the veteran was exposed to in service and the examiner must be instructed to consider only those stressors in determining whether the veteran has PTSD. All indicated tests and studies should be performed, and all clinical findings should be reported in detail. It is essential that the claims file be provided to the psychiatrist for review in conjunction with the examination, together with a copy of this remand. The examination report is to reflect whether such a review of the claims file was made. A diagnosis of PTSD under DSM IV criteria should be made or ruled out. If PTSD is diagnosed, the psychiatrist should identify the independently verifiable in- service stressor(s) supporting the diagnosis. If PTSD is not diagnosed, the examiner should explain why the diagnosis was not made. Adequate reasons and bases for any opinion rendered must be provided. 4. The veteran must be given adequate notice of the date and place of any requested examination. A copy of all notifications, including the address where the notice was sent must be associated with the claims folder. The veteran is to be advised that failure to report for a scheduled VA examination without good cause shown may have adverse effects on his claim. 5. After the development requested above has been completed to the extent possible, the AMC/RO should again review the record. If any benefit sought on appeal, for which a notice of disagreement has been filed, remains denied, the appellant and representative, if any, should be furnished a supplemental statement of the case and given the opportunity to respond thereto. (CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE) The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters 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). _________________________________________________ Dennis F. Chiappetta 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).