Citation Nr: 1318249 Decision Date: 06/05/13 Archive Date: 06/11/13 DOCKET NO. 11-18 496 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in New York, New York THE ISSUE Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 30 percent for service-connected posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). REPRESENTATION Veteran represented by: Disabled American Veterans ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD L. Durham, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from August 1942 to November 1945. This case comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2010 rating decision, which continued a 30 percent evaluation for service-connected PTSD. 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 Veteran alleges that his service-connected PTSD warrants a higher evaluation. Additional development is necessary prior to the adjudication of this claim. The United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) has held that a Veteran is entitled to a new VA examination where there is evidence, including his statements, that the disability has worsened since the last examination. See Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400 (1997); Caffrey v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 377 (1994). The Court has also held that VA's statutory duty to assist the Veteran includes the duty to conduct a thorough and contemporaneous examination so that the evaluation of the claimed disability will be a fully informed one. See Green v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 121, 124 (1991). In this case, the Veteran's representative contended in a September 2012 statement that "a 646 would be premature at this time as the last examination of record was January 2010. Where the veteran claims a disability is worse than when originally rated, and the available evidence is too old to adequately evaluate the state of the condition, the VA must provide a new examination. Proscelle v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 629, 632 (1992); Olson v. Principi, 3 Vet.App. 480, 482 (1992)." As it appears that the representative is clearly implying in these statements that the Veteran's PTSD has worsened in severity since the January 2010 VA examination, this claim must be remanded in order to afford the Veteran a new VA examination to determine the current severity of his service-connected PTSD. Additionally, upon remand, the RO/AMC should obtain any recent VA treatment records that have not yet been associated with the claims file. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: (Please note, this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2012). Expedited handling is requested.) 1. Obtain any and all relevant VA treatment records that have not yet been associated with the claims file. 2. Provide the Veteran with a VA psychiatric examination in order to determine the current severity of his PTSD. The claims folder must be made available to the examiner and pertinent documents therein should be reviewed by the examiner. The examiner must note in the examination report that the claims folder was reviewed in conjunction with the examination. All necessary tests and studies should be accomplished, and all clinical findings should be reported in detail. The examiner should provide an opinion concerning the current degree of social and industrial impairment resulting from the Veteran's service-connected PTSD. In addressing this matter, the examiner should also provide a Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) score, along with an explanation of that score. Please provide the reasons behind all opinions expressed. 3. Then, readjudicate the claim. If the benefit sought on appeal remains denied, the Veteran should be provided a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC), which includes a summary of additional evidence submitted, any additional applicable laws and regulations, and the reasons for the decision. After the Veteran and his representative have been given the applicable time to submit additional argument, the claim should be returned to the Board for further review. The Veteran 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). No further action is required of the Veteran until further notice. However, the Board takes this opportunity to advise the Veteran that the conduct of the efforts as directed in this remand, as well as any other development deemed necessary, is needed for comprehensive and correct adjudication of his claim. His cooperation in VA's efforts to develop his claim, including reporting for any scheduled VA examination, is both critical and appreciated. The Veteran is also advised that failure to report for any scheduled examination may result in the denial of a claim. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.655 (2012). This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board or by the Court 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). _________________________________________________ MICHAEL A. PAPPAS Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board is appealable to the Court. 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).