Citation Nr: 1319156 Decision Date: 06/12/13 Archive Date: 06/21/13 DOCKET NO. 09-14 126 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Chicago, Illinois THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, other than posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL The Veteran ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD L. Jeng, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from May 1969 to April 1971. This case comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (the Board) on appeal from a March 2006 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Muskogee, Oklahoma. Jurisdiction of this matter has since been transferred to the RO in Chicago, Illinois. In November 2011, the Veteran presented testimony in a videoconference hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A copy of the transcript has been associated with the claims folder. In February 2011 and January 2013, the Board remanded this matter for further development, and the case has been returned to the Board for appellate consideration. As noted in the January 2013 Board decision/remand, the Veteran's specific claim related to service connection for PTSD. During the pendency of this appeal, a Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) decision held that a veteran, who is a lay person, is not competent to diagnose his specific psychiatric disability. Therefore, VA must consider whether the Veteran's psychiatric symptoms regardless of the label attached to them warrant service connection. Clemons v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 1 (2009). The evidence of record reflects that the Veteran has been diagnosed with various psychiatric disorders, to include PTSD and depressive disorder. Accordingly, the Board recharacterized the issues as service connection for PTSD and service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability, other than PTSD. Notably, in the January 2013 decision, the Board denied service connection for PTSD but remanded the issue of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability, other than PTSD. The Board notes that, in addition to the paper claims file, there is a Virtual VA electronic claims file associated with the Veteran's claim. The Board has considered the records contained in the electronic claims file and the paper claims folder in adjudicating this decision. 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 In the Board's January 2013 remand, the AMC/RO was instructed to "adjudicate the issue of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, other than PTSD, based on all pertinent evidence and legal authority." Although the AMC issued a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) in March 2013, it readjudicated the issue of service connection for PTSD (which the Board denied in January 2013) and not an acquired psychiatric disorder, other than PTSD, as specifically directed by the Board. As the AMC did not comply with the Board's remand directives, the Board must remand for another SSOC specifically addressing the remaining issue of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, other than PTSD. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998) (noting that where the remand orders of the Board are not complied with, the Board errs as a matter of law when it fails to ensure compliance). Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following actions: Adjudicate the issue of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, other than PTSD, based on all pertinent evidence and legal authority. If the benefit sought on appeal is denied, the RO must furnish to the Veteran an appropriate SSOC that includes clear reasons and bases for all determinations, and afford him the appropriate time period for response before the claims file is returned to the Board for further appellate consideration. The Veteran has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter 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). _________________________________________________ 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 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).