Citation Nr: 0814453 Decision Date: 05/01/08 Archive Date: 05/12/08 DOCKET NO. 00-14 034 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in New York, New York THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD S.M. Cieplak, Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from January 20, 1964 to October 16, 1964. This appeal comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2000 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in New York, New York. In June 2005, the Board reopened a claim for entitlement to service connection for and acquired psychiatric disorder and remanded the matter to the RO to afford due process and for other development. Thereafter, the RO continued the denial of the veteran's claim (as reflected in a January 2008 supplemental SOC (SSOC)) and returned this matter to the Board for further appellate consideration. 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 claims file contains medical evidence suggesting that the veteran has a psychiatric disorder may have had its onset during service; however, the September 1964 separation physical examination only noted the presence of a personality disorder and post service treatment records show psychiatric treatment in the 1980s, many years after service discharge. However, the veteran's VA physician indicated that the veteran's mental disability was possibly related to his military experiences. It was not indicated in the statement whether the physician reviewed the claims folder and service medical records prior to rendering his opinion. Pursuant to the Board's June 2005 remand, the veteran was to have been afforded a VA examination by a psychiatrist. However, the veteran was afforded an examination by a psychologist the VAMC in Albany. The examiner concluded in essence that the veteran's mental disorders were unrelated to service. However, the examination report failed to provide the requested detailed response vis-à-vis discussion of specific evidence of record, including service medical records and the January 2000 opinion from the VA physician. The RO has not complied with the Board's June 2005 remand directives. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998) (holding that a remand by the Board confers on the veteran, as a matter of law, the right to compliance with the remand orders). The Board observes that the veteran was subsequently afforded the opportunity to have another examination at VA Medical Center at White River Junction because a psychiatrist was not available at the Albany VAMC. However, he indicated that he was unable to attend an examination at that facility because of illness but suggested that he could attend an examination at the Albany VAMC. The Board observes that the approximate distance from the veteran's residence to the VAMC in Albany is approximately 10 miles whereas the distance to the facility at White River Junction is approximately 138 miles and does not consider that the facility in Vermont is a reasonable alternative. Under the circumstances, the Board considers that the duty to assist has not been fulfilled. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. . The veteran should then be afforded either a VA psychiatric examination or a contract psychiatric examination. Prior to the examination, the claims folder must be made available to the psychiatrist for review of the case. A notation to the effect that this record review took place should be included in the report of the psychiatrist. The psychiatrist should elicit from the veteran a comprehensive social, educational and occupational history including information regarding the onset and progression of relevant symptoms. All indicated tests and studies, including psychological examination/testing, if necessary, are to be performed and the examiner should review the results of any testing prior to completing the report. All findings should be reported in detail. The psychiatrist should discuss the nature and extent of any psychiatric disorder, if present, and then set forth the medical probabilities that this disorder, if present, is traceable to any symptoms or treatment the veteran experienced during his military service. Specifically, the examiner should address whether the veteran has an acquired psychiatric disorder and if so, is it at least as likely as not that the first clinical manifestations of it occurred while the veteran was in service from January 1964 to October 1964, or was a psychosis present within one year following the veteran's separation from service? Any opinion provided should include discussion of specific evidence of record, including service medical records and the January 2000 opinion from the VA physician. The basis for the conclusions reached should be stated in full, and any opinion contrary to those already of record should be reconciled, to the extent possible. If the physician is unable to answer any of the questions posed with any degree of medical certainty, he or she should clearly so state. 2. The veteran must be given adequate notice of the date and place of any requested examination. A copy of all notifications must be associated with the claims folder. The veteran is hereby advised that failure to report for a scheduled VA examination without good cause shown may have adverse effects on his claim. 3. After completing the requested action, and any additional notification and/or development deemed warranted, the RO should readjudicate the claim by evaluating all evidence obtained after the last statement or supplemental statement of the case was issued. If the benefit sought on appeal remains denied, the RO must furnish the veteran an appropriate supplemental statement of the case and allow him a reasonable period of time to respond. The SSOC must contain notice of all relevant actions taken on the claim for benefits, to include a summary of the evidence and applicable law and regulations considered pertinent to the issue currently on appeal, including VCAA and any other legal precedent. 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). _________________________________________________ RENÉE M. PELLETIER 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).