Citation Nr: 1513228 Decision Date: 03/27/15 Archive Date: 04/03/15 DOCKET NO. 13-01 085 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Providence, Rhode Island THE ISSUE Entitlement to an initial evaluation in excess of 30 percent for panic disorder with social phobia. REPRESENTATION Veteran represented by: Disabled American Veterans ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD J. Trickey, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from August 1966 to August 1969. This case comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA or Board) on appeal from an April 2012 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Providence, Rhode Island. In that decision, the RO granted service connection for a panic disorder with social phobia and assigned a 30 percent evaluation effective from April 11, 2011. In addition to the paper claims file, there are Virtual VA and Veterans Benefits Management System (VBMS) paperless files associated with the Veteran's case. A review of the documents in those files reveals documents that are either duplicative of the evidence in the paper claims file or irrelevant to the issue on appeal with the exception of a January 2015 brief from the Veteran's representative. The appeal is REMANDED to the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ). VA will notify the appellant if further action is required. REMAND The Veteran was last afforded a VA examination in connection with his claim in February 2013. However, a December 2013 progress note suggests that his symptoms may have worsened since that time. For example, at the examination, the Veteran reported having panic-like attacks two to three times a week, whereas the progress note indicated that he had nightly panic attacks. The Veteran also reported having good relationships with his wife and adult children during the February 2013 VA examination, yet the December 2013 progress note indicates that the Veteran had increased irritability and family dissonance. Moreover, the Veteran's representative specifically asserted in a January 2015 brief that his symptoms have worsened since the February 2013 VA examination. VA's General Counsel has indicated that, when a claimant asserts that the severity of a disability has increased since the most recent rating examination, an additional examination is appropriate. VAOPGCPREC 11-95 (April 7, 1995); see also Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400 (1997); Caffrey v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 377 (1994). Therefore, the Board finds that a more recent VA examination is needed to ascertain the current severity and manifestations of the Veteran's disability. The Board further notes that additional evidence has been received, which was not previously considered by the RO. A supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) was not issued, and the appellant did not submit a waiver of the RO's initial consideration of the evidence. As such, the additional evidence must be referred to the AOJ for review and preparation of a SSOC, if a grant of the benefit sought is not made. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The AOJ should request that the Veteran provide the names and addresses of any and all health care providers who have provided treatment for his service-connected panic disorder with social phobia. After acquiring this information and obtaining any necessary authorization, the AOJ should obtain and associate these records with the claims file. The AOJ should also secure any outstanding, relevant VA medical records, to include treatment records dated since February 2013. 2. After completing the preceding development, the Veteran should be afforded a VA examination to ascertain the current severity and manifestations of his service-connected panic disorder with social phobia. Any and all studies, tests, and evaluations deemed necessary by the examiner should be performed. The examiner is requested to review all pertinent records associated with the claims file and to comment on the severity of the Veteran's service-connected disability. The examiner should report all signs and symptoms necessary for rating the Veteran's panic disorder with social phobia under the General Rating Formula for Mental Disorders. The findings of the examiner should address the level of social and occupational impairment attributable to the Veteran's disability. If applicable, the examiner is asked to identify the specific symptomatology due solely to the Veteran's service-connected panic disorder with social phobia, as opposed to any nonservice-connected disorder. If is not possible to separate such symptomatology, the examiner should so indicate in his or her report. A clear rationale for all opinions would be helpful and a discussion of the facts and medical principles involved would be of considerable assistance to the Board. Because it is important "that each disability be viewed in relation to its history [,]" 38 C.F.R. § 4.1, copies of all pertinent records in the appellant's claims file, or in the alternative, the claims file, must be made available to the examiner for review. 3. After completing the above actions, the AOJ should conduct any other development as may be indicated by a response received as a consequence of the actions taken in the preceding paragraphs. 4. When the development requested has been completed, the case should be reviewed by the AOJ on the basis of additional evidence, to include all evidence associated with the record since the February 2013 supplemental statement of the case. If the benefit sought is not granted, the Veteran and his representative should be furnished a supplemental statement of the case and be afforded a reasonable opportunity to respond before the record is returned to the Board for further review. 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 2014). _________________________________________________ J.W. ZISSIMOS Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2014), 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) (2014).