Citation Nr: 1319470 Decision Date: 06/17/13 Archive Date: 06/27/13 DOCKET NO. 09-49 914 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Providence, Rhode Island THE ISSUE Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 10 percent for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) with anxiety and depression. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Christopher Murray, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran had active military service from June 2005 to November 2005 and from December 2005 to November 2006. This case comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal of an August 2009 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Providence, Rhode Island. 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 asserts entitlement to an increased evaluation for PTSD with anxiety and depression, currently evaluated as 10 percent disabling. The record indicates he was last provided a VA examination addressing his psychiatric disability in June 2009, a period of approximately four years. It is also noted that he was scheduled for a VA examination in August 2011 but failed to report. The notification letter is not of record. It is unclear as to whether the Veteran was properly notified of the time and place of the examination. In a May 2013 brief, the appellant's representative argued that the June 2009 VA examination does not reflect the current severity of his PTSD given his deteriorating mental health. In light of the appellant's contentions of deteriorating mental health, the length of time since his PTSD was last evaluated, and the notice issue regarding the August 2011 VA examination, the Board finds a new examination is warranted to address the severity of his service-connected psychiatric disability. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.159; see also VAOPGCPREC 11-95 (1995) (a new examination is appropriate when there is an assertion of an increase in severity since the last examination); Green v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 121, 124 (1991) (holding that VA's statutory duty to assist includes a thorough and contemporaneous medical examination). Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Associate with the claims file all VA records related to mental health treatment generated since December 28, 2010. Efforts to obtain these records must be associated with the claims file and requests for these records must continue until the AOJ determines that the records sought do not exist or that further efforts to obtain those records would be futile. 2. Schedule the Veteran for a VA psychiatric examination to determine the current degree of severity of his PTSD with anxiety and depression. The entire claims file (i.e. the paper claims file and any medical records contained in Virtual VA, CAPRI, and AMIE) must be reviewed by the examiner in conjunction with the examination. If the examiner does not have access to Virtual VA, any relevant treatment records contained in the Virtual VA file that are not available on CAPRI or AMIE must be printed and associated with the paper claims file so they can be available to the examiner for review. The examiner should identify the nature, frequency, and severity of all current manifestations of the Veteran's current service-connected psychiatric disability. The examination report should include a full psychiatric diagnostic assessment including a Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) score on Axis V and an explanation of the significance of the current levels of psychological, social, and occupational functioning which support the score. The examiner should also specifically comment on the impact of the Veteran's PTSD upon his social and industrial activities including his employability. A complete rationale should be given for all opinions and conclusions expressed. The Veteran is also advised that failure to report for any scheduled examination may result in the denial of a claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.655. 3. After completing the above, and any other development deemed necessary, readjudicate the Veteran's claim based on the entirety of the evidence. If the benefits sought on appeal are not granted to the appellant's satisfaction, he and his representative should be provided with a supplemental statement of the case. An appropriate period of time should be allowed for response. 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. PARAKKAL 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).