Citation Nr: 1005352 Decision Date: 02/05/10 Archive Date: 02/25/10 DOCKET NO. 08-14 942 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Montgomery, Alabama THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Alabama Department of Veterans Affairs ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Terrence Griffin, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from January 1968 to December 1970. This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a decision of November 2006 by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) St. Petersburg, Florida, Regional Office (RO). In reviewing the claims folder, the Board notes that in a September 2009 statement the Veteran made a reference to "clear and unmistakable error." Clear and unmistakable error (CUE) is a specific type of claim that is filed in regard to a decision that has become final. As such, CUE cannot be alleged with regard to denial of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD. This claim is on appeal to the Board. To the extent that the Veteran wishes to file a CUE claim related to a final decision, other than the matter on appeal, he should file a specific CUE claim with the RO, identifying the specific rating decision he believes was in error and identifying the specific error that was made. 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's Claims Assistance Act (VCAA) outlines the VA's duties to assist a claimant substantiate his claim. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A (West 2002). Part of this duty requires the VA to make reasonable efforts to assist a claimant in obtaining evidence necessary to substantiate the claimant's claim for VA benefits. Id The Veteran maintains that his current acquired psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD, is the result of his experiences while serving in Vietnam. In his various statements, the Veteran describes coming under enemy fire, witnessing a fellow service member shoot himself in the head, and the maiming of numerous others attached to his unit. The Veteran's Record of Assignment reflects that he was assigned to the 62nd Company, 37th Signal Battalion from July 1969 to March 1970, and to the USASTRATCOM Signal Support Detachment, Da Nang from March 1970 to September 1970. Although the RO was unable to confirm the death of a fellow service member, as described by the Veteran, the record does not reflect sufficient efforts to confirm the Veteran's other stressors. As such, additional efforts to assist the Veteran in order to confirm his stressors must be undertaken. The Board notes that the Veteran's VA treatment records reflect his extensive individual and group treatment for PTSD. However, these treatment records do not clearly relate any diagnosed PTSD to the Veteran's claimed stressors, which is also required to establish service connection for this condition. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f). In the event any of the Veteran's claimed stressors are confirmed, VA's duty to provide an appropriate examination will be triggered. McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 76 (2006) Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The AMC/RO must contact the U.S. Army and Joint Services Records Research Center (JSRRC), or other appropriate repository, and request such documents as would reflect the events described by the Veteran, to include Operations and Lessons Learned Reports, and unit histories. This request should cover July 1969 to March 1970 when the Veteran was attached to the 62nd Company, 37th Signal Battalion (62dSigCo/37thSigBn) and March 1970 to September 1970 when he was attached to USASTRATCOM Signal Support Detachment, Da Nang (USASTRATCOMSigSptDetDaNang). All obtained Operations Reports and Lessons Learned Reports, unit histories, and/or negative responses should be associated with the Veteran's claims folder. 2. Thereafter the AMC/RO should attempt to verify the Veteran's stressors by reviewing the obtained records to ascertain whether members of the unit came under fire, were maimed by enemy fire and/or engaged in combat, as described by the Veteran (to include ascertaining whether a Anthony Leboard, or individual with a similar name, was killed or transferred to a medical facility). 3. If a stressor is confirmed, the Veteran should be afforded a VA examination to determine the etiology of any currently diagnosed acquired psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD. The claims folder should be reviewed by the examiner and that review should be indicated in the examination report. The VA examiner's opinion should specifically address the following: a) Diagnose any current acquired psychiatric disorder. b) Provide a full multi-axial diagnosis and specifically state whether or not each criterion for a diagnosis of PTSD is met pursuant to the Diagnostic and Statistic Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM- IV). c) If a diagnosis of PTSD is warranted, specify the specific in- service stressor or stressors upon which that diagnosis is based. d) Discuss whether any currently diagnosed acquired psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD, is otherwise related to the Veteran's period of service. 4. The AMC/RO should thereafter review the additional evidence that has been obtained and determine whether the benefit sought on appeal may now be granted. If the benefit sought on appeal remains denied, the Veteran and his representative should be furnished a supplemental statement of the case and given the opportunity to respond thereto. 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. 2009). _________________________________________________ Michael J. Skaltsounis Acting 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) (2009).