Citation Nr: 1323646 Decision Date: 07/24/13 Archive Date: 08/01/13 DOCKET NO. 07-07 832 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Buffalo, New York THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: The American Legion ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Robert E. P. Jones, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from June 1972 to March 1980. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a February 2006 decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Buffalo, New York. The Veteran's claim was remanded by the Board in November 2010 and January 2013. A review of the Veteran's virtual VA folder reveals that all documents in that folder have already been considered by the RO in adjudicating the Veteran's claim. 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 that he has PTSD due to stressors that occurred in Korea and Germany. In March 2006 the Veteran reported that in July 1973 he was working in a truck repair shop at Camp Casey, Korea, when he saw a fellow soldier hit by a truck and badly injured. He reported that in December 1977, while stationed in Darmstadt, Germany, he had to identify an overdose victim with needles still stuck in his veins. The Veteran also reported that he witnessed deaths while involved in a firefight along the Korean DMZ in December 1973. In February 2013, the AMC wrote to the U.S. Army Crime Records Center (USACRC) seeking verification of the three stressors reported above. A reply was received from the USACRC in March 2014. With regard to the truck injury stressor, the USACRC indicated that there was "NO RECORD" of any such accident. However, the representative at USACRC also wrote a note asking "Where in Korea did incident take place"? The AMC did not respond with the information that the alleged stressor reportedly occurred at Camp Casey, Korea. The duty to assist requires that VA provide the location of the alleged stressor to the USACRC in order that an informed verification search may be made. With regard to the alleged stressor of a firefight along the Korean DMZ, the USACRC indicated that there was "NO RECORD" of any such firefight in which there were deaths. Once again, the representative at USACRC wrote a note asking "Where in Korea did incident take place". With regard to this alleged stressor, no further development with the USACRC is necessary. The Board notes that despite requests for information, the Veteran has not provided any information as to where along the DMZ the alleged firefight occurred. With regard to the alleged stressor regarding the overdose victim, the record does not contain any response from the USACRC. The Board further notes that the AMC's letter to the USACRC requesting verification of this stressor failed to indicate that the Veteran reported that the stressor occurred in Darmstadt, Germany. The AMC should again request verification of the Veteran's alleged stressor regarding the overdose victim, and this should include informing the USACRC that the Veteran has reported that the incident occurred in Darmstadt, Germany. In light of the above, the duty to assist requires that another request be sent to the USACRC containing the additional information the USACRC requested with regard to the alleged truck injury and drug overdose stressors. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Send another letter to the U.S. Army Crime Records Center similar to the letter sent by AMC to the USACRC on February 19, 2013. In doing so, request verification of incidents #1 (truck repair accident) and #3 (overdose victim). Add to the previous information supplied in the prior letter that the truck repair accident reportedly occurred at Camp Casey, Korea, and that the overdose incident reportedly occurred in Darmstadt, Germany. 2. After the above has been accomplished, if any of the Veteran's claimed stressors are deemed to be verified, afford the Veteran a VA PTSD examination. The examiner should be provided the Veteran's claims folder to review in conjunction with the examination. Review of the entire file is requested; however attention is invited to the Veteran's treatment for various psychiatric disorders, to include PTSD, depression, and mood disorder. If the examiner determines that the Veteran has PTSD, the examiner should offer an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) that the Veteran's PTSD is caused by a verified stressor. If the examiner determines that the Veteran has another psychiatric disorder, the examiner should offer an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) that the disorder is related to the Veteran's service. The examiner is reminded that the term "as likely as not" does not mean "within the realm of medical possibility," but rather that the evidence of record is so evenly divided that, in the examiner's expert opinion, it is as medically sound to find in favor of the proposition as it is to find against it. The examiner is also asked to provide the reasons behind any opinion expressed. 3. Following the above development, review the claims file and readjudicate the Veteran's claim of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder to include PTSD. If the benefit sought on appeal remains denied, the Veteran and his representative should be furnished a supplemental statement of the case and given the opportunity to respond thereto before the case is returned to the Board. The appellant 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). _________________________________________________ BETHANY L. BUCK 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).