Citation Nr: 1304502 Decision Date: 02/07/13 Archive Date: 02/19/13 DOCKET NO. 07-36 131 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Waco, Texas THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). 2. Entitlement to service connection for congestive heart failure. 3. Entitlement to service connection for arthritis. 4. Entitlement to service connection for carpal tunnel syndrome. REPRESENTATION Veteran represented by: Texas Veterans Commission ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Arif Syed, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from May 1978 to July 1988, with service from September 1984 to July 1988 indicating service resulting in an other than honorable discharge. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from an April 2007 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Board observes that the Veteran's psychiatric disorder claim was certified as a claim for service connection for PTSD. However, the Board notes that the Veteran's treatment records assign varying diagnoses to her symptoms. When the record associates different diagnoses with the same symptoms, the nature of the Veteran's disorder is a question of fact for the Board, and once determined, the Board must address whether the Veteran's symptoms, regardless of diagnosis, are related to service. See Clemons v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 1 (2009) (holding that when a claimant makes a claim, he is seeking service connection for symptoms regardless of how those symptoms are diagnosed or labeled). Therefore, the Board has recharacterized the issue to encompass any acquired psychiatric disorder, as reflected above. In June 2009 and September 2010, the Board remanded the Veteran's claims. The agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) continued the previous denial of the claims in March 2010 and July 2012 supplemental statements of the case (SSOC). Accordingly, the Veteran's VA claims folder has been returned to the Board for further appellate proceedings. The Board has reviewed the Veteran's claims folder and the record maintained in the Virtual VA paperless claims processing system. The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the Veteran if further action is required. REMAND The Board observes that the evidence of record indicates that the Veteran is in receipt of Social Security Administration (SSA) disability benefits. See, e.g., a copy of a decision from SSA dated November 2008. There is no indication in the record that any attempts have been made to obtain these records and, indeed, a complete copy of her SSA records does not appear to be associated with the claims folder. The VCAA describes VA's duties to notify and assist claimants in substantiating a claim for VA benefits. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5100, 5102, 5103, 5103A, 5107, 5126 (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.156(a), 3.159 and 3.326(a) (2012). Additionally, the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims has held that, where VA has notice that the veteran is receiving disability benefits from the Social Security Administration (SSA), and that records from that agency may be relevant, VA has a duty to acquire a copy of the decision granting Social Security disability benefits, and the supporting medical documents on which the decision was based. See Hayes v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 67 (1996). Furthermore, the VCAA emphasizes the need for VA to obtain records from other Government agencies. See 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A (b)(3), (c)(3) (West 2002). Under the circumstances presented here, the RO should request the Veteran's SSA medical records. The Board also observes that the Veteran submitted a statement dated August 2012 indicating that she currently receives treatment for her congestive heart failure, arthritis, carpel tunnel syndrome, and PTSD within the North Texas VA Health Care System. The Board notes that the most recent VA treatment records associated with the Veteran's claims folder are dated in November 2010. The procurement of such pertinent VA medical reports is required. Where VA has constructive and actual knowledge of the availability of pertinent reports in the possession of the VA, an attempt to obtain those reports must be made. See Bell v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 611 (1992) (holding that documents which were not actually before the adjudicators but had been generated by VA employees or submitted to VA by claimant were, "in contemplation of law, before the Secretary and the Board and should be included in the record"). In light of the foregoing, the Board finds that an attempt should be made to identify and associate these records with the Veteran's claims folder. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The RO should request the SSA to provide copies of any records pertaining to the Veteran's application for SSA disability benefits, to include any medical records obtained in connection with the application. Any materials obtained should be associated with the Veteran's VA claims folder. 2. Associate all VA treatment records for the Veteran from the North Texas VA Health Care System dated after November 2010 with the claims folder. All requests and responses, positive and negative, should be associated with the claims folder. 3. When the development requested has been completed, and after reviewing the newly submitted evidence and determining whether further evidentiary development is required, the Veteran's claims should be readjudicated. If the benefits sought are not granted, the Veteran and her representative should be furnished a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) and be afforded a reasonable opportunity to respond before the record is returned to the Board for further review. The Veteran has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on this matter. See Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). This appeal 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). _________________________________________________ A. C. MACKENZIE 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) (2012).