Citation Nr: 1300469 Decision Date: 01/07/13 Archive Date: 01/11/13 DOCKET NO. 11-27 885 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Newark, New Jersey THE ISSUE Entitlement to an initial disability rating in excess of 50 percent for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Vietnam Veterans of America ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD C. R. dela Rosa, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran had active military service from February 1966 to January 1968. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a November 2010 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) that granted service connection for PTSD. The Veteran disagreed with the evaluation assigned. Evidence was submitted directly to the Board with a waiver of agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) consideration. See 38 C.F.R. § 20.1304. Therefore the Board may consider this evidence in the first instance. 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 After a review of the record, the Board observes that further development is required prior to adjudicating the Veteran's claim for an increased rating for PTSD. The Veteran was last afforded a VA examination for his PTSD in September 2010. The Veteran and his significant other have submitted statements in 2012 suggesting his condition may have worsened since his last examination, and outpatient treatment records reflect the Veteran reporting some additional symtpoms. When available evidence is too old for an adequate evaluation of the Veteran's current condition, VA's duty to assist includes providing a new examination. Weggenmann v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 281 (1993). Because there may have been changes in the Veteran's condition since the last examination, the Board finds that a new psychiatric examination would aid in fully and fairly evaluating the Veteran's claim for an increased rating. Allday v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 517 (1995) (where the record does not adequately reveal current state of disability, fulfillment of duty to assist requires a contemporaneous medical examination, particularly if there is no additional medical evidence that adequately addresses the level of impairment of the disability since previous examination); Caffrey v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 377 (1994); Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400 (1997). Relevant ongoing medical records should also be requested. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A(c) (West 2002); see also Bell v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 611 (1992) (VA medical records are in constructive possession of the agency, and must be obtained if the material could be determinative of the claim). Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Ask the Veteran to provide the names, addresses, and approximate dates of treatment of all health care providers who have treated him for his PTSD. After securing any necessary releases, the RO/AMC should request any records identified which are not duplicates of those contained in the claims file. If any requested records are unavailable, then the file should be annotated as such and the Veteran should be so notified. In addition, obtain all relevant ongoing VA treatment records dating since September 2011 from the VA Medical Center in Lyons, New Jersey and associated clinics. 2. Schedule the Veteran for a VA psychiatric examination to determine the current severity of his service connected PTSD with depressive elements. The examiner must review the claims folder in conjunction with the examination. All tests or studies deemed necessary should be conducted, and the results should be reported in detail. The examiner should assign a Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) score for the Veteran's service-connected PTSD with depressive elements and indicate the impact of the disorder on occupational and social functioning. 3. After the development requested above as well as any additional development deemed necessary has been completed, the record should again be reviewed. If the benefits sought on appeal remain denied then the Veteran and his representative should be furnished with a supplemental statement of the case and be given the opportunity to respond thereto. The case should then be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration, if in order. 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. 2012). _________________________________________________ K. A. BANFIELD 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) (2012).