Citation Nr: 0813389 Decision Date: 04/23/08 Archive Date: 05/01/08 DOCKET NO. 03-01 736 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Waco, Texas THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). 2. Entitlement to service connection for bipolar disorder. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Sean A. Kendall, Attorney at Law WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD K. Curameng, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran had active duty service from October 1964 to September 1965. This matter was previously denied by the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) in May 2005. In August 2006, the veteran appealed the Board's May 2005 denial to the United States Court of Appeal for Veterans Claims (Court). By order dated in August 15, 2006, the Court remanded for compliance with the instructions in the August 2006 joint motion. This matter was before the Board again in November 2006. In compliance with the August 15, 2006 order, the Board remanded the case for further development in November 2006. The veteran testified at a hearing at the RO in March 2004 and at a Board videoconference hearing in December 2007. At the Board hearing, the record was held open for an additional 60 days to allow the veteran to further submit evidence. Additional evidence and waiver of preliminary RO review were both received in February 2008. 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 In a letter dated in January 2008, Bruce Gottlieb L.C.S.W. referred to medication given the veteran during service and opined that the symptoms which were treated were at least as likely as not the first symptoms of psychiatric disability. Although not entirely clear, it appear that the opinion was intended to contemplate both PTSD and bipolar disorder as having been manifested during service. Although the veteran was afforded a VA examination in March 2003, the opinion of Mr. Gottlieb was not associated with the veteran's claims file. Also not of record at the time of the March 2003 VA examination was the veteran's complete Social Security files. The Board believes that another VA examination and opinion would be appropriate to fully comply with 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(4). Additionally, when asked in a March 2004 hearing before a decision review officer (DRO) if he ever talked to any doctor other than the ones at VA examinations about whether his bipolar disorder started while in service, the veteran responded that he went to the emergency room at Scott & White, which the Board notes is located in Temple, Texas. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Action should be taken to contact the veteran and obtain appropriate consent to the release of medical records from Scott & White located in Temple, Texas. The RO should then take appropriate action to request copies of all medical records from the above medical facility. 2. The veteran should also be afforded an appropriate VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of any PTSD and bipolar disorder. It is imperative that the claims file be made available to the examiner for review in connection with the examination. Any medically indicated special tests should be accomplished. a) If bipolar disorder is diagnosed, the examiner should also offer an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50% or higher degree of probability) that bipolar disorder was manifested during service. b) If PTSD is diagnosed, the examiner should also offer an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50% or higher degree of probability) that PTSD was manifested during service. The VA examiner should offer a rationale for all opinions expressed, including the significance of any psychiatric symptomatology during service, and should also set forth reasons for agreeing or disagreeing with the opinion offered by Bruce Gottlieb L.C.S.W. 3. After completion of the above, the RO should review the expanded record and determine if service connection for PTSD and for bipolar disorder is warranted. If the benefit remains denied, the veteran and his representative should be furnished an appropriate supplemental statement of the case and be afforded an opportunity to respond. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board for appellate review. 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). _________________________________________________ ALAN S. PEEVY 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).