Citation Nr: 18145156
Decision Date: 10/26/18	Archive Date: 10/26/18

DOCKET NO. 14-13 553
DATE:	October 26, 2018
REMANDED
Service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded.
REASONS FOR REMAND
In August 2016, the Board remanded the appeal for service connection for vertigo, in addition to the present claim. The RO granted service connection for vertigo in October 2017; this constitutes a full grant of the issue on appeal and it is no longer before the Board. 
The Board remanded the present matter to obtain evidence corroborating the Veteran’s claimed PTSD stressors, including his contention that he cleaned the wreckage of a plane crash that killed his fiancée. Evidence was obtained that confirmed an aircraft crashed at the naval base in Atsugi, Japan while the Veteran was based there. The evidence also confirmed that one female servicemember, R.J.D., was on board the aircraft and died. While the Veteran has been diagnosed with PTSD, it was based on other stressors that are currently not verified.  However, since this stressor appears to be verified, a remand is necessary to assess whether this stressor is sufficient to justify a PTSD diagnosis.  
Furthermore, the Board finds that further attempts should be made to obtain information about the female service member who died in the crash in an effort to corroborate the Veteran’s claim. Despite filing statements describing his stressors in February 2010, December 2010, February 2013, and October 2013, the Veteran did not disclose that he was engaged to a fellow service member who died in a plane crash, the wreckage for which he had to clean, until the March 2016 Board hearing. Importantly, the Veteran did not disclose her name in this hearing nor has he submitted any evidence corroborating this was his fiancée.  The female service member identified as dying in this air crash served in the Navy, rather than the Marine Corps. The Board thus finds that it is imperative to obtain her personnel records to the extent permitted by the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and 38 U.S.C. § 5701, and in compliance with VAOPGCPREC 5-2014 (issued Jan. 5, 2017), to obtain information that may support the Veteran’s stressor. 
The matter is REMANDED for the following action:
1. Send the Veteran a request for more information that could corroborate his relationship with the individual who died in the plane crash and allow an appropriate amount of time for a response. 
2. Contact the Casualty Assistance Section of Military Personnel Services, the Naval Safety Center, and/or the Office of the Judge Advocate General to obtain any further details regarding the death of R.J.D.
3. Make reasonable efforts to obtain R.J.D.’s military personnel records that document her duty stations and her marital status at the time of her death, to the extent permitted under all applicable privacy restrictions, including those enumerated in FOIA and 38 U.S.C. § 5701, and in compliance with VAOPGCPREC 5-2014.
4. DO NOT SCHEDULE THE FOLLOWING EXAMINATION UNTIL THE ABOVE DEVELOPMENT HAS BEEN FULLY COMPLETED TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE.  
5. Schedule the Veteran for a VA PTSD examination. After examination and review of the claims file, the examiner must respond to the following:
(a.) The Veteran contends that a mail carrier plane crashed at the naval base at which he was stationed and that he had to clean the wreckage. He further contends that he was engaged to the female servicemember who died in the crash and was familiar with the other occupants. 
(b.) Is the stressor described in subpart (a) sufficient, on its own, to support a PTSD diagnosis? 
(c.) If so, is it at least as likely as not that the Veteran’s PTSD diagnosis is related to the stressor described in subpart (a)? 
 
MICHELLE L. KANE
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	M. Lavan, Associate Counsel