Citation Nr: 18155576 Decision Date: 12/04/18 Archive Date: 12/04/18 DOCKET NO. 16-47 909 DATE: December 4, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral elbow disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral wrist disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a back disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a neck disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral ankle disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral foot disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral eye disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for allergies is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for hypertension is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a hernia disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for migraines is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral leg disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a psychiatric disorder, to include posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) due to military sexual trauma, is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a jaw disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active naval service from June 2010 to March 2011. She also had periods of active duty for training (ACDUTRA) with the United States Navy Reserve, including from June 10, 2012, to June 26, 2012, and from March 10, 2013, to June 21, 2013. This case comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2016 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Houston, Texas. In this case, the claims file includes the Veteran’s service treatment and personnel records; however, it is unclear whether those records are complete. In her September 2016 substantive appeal (VA Form 9), the Veteran asserted that the RO did not have access to her complete medical records. In her March 2016 notice of disagreement (NOD), she stated that she was rushed to the hospital in May 2013 during a period of ACDUTRA; however, those records are not in the claims file. The Board notes that the Veteran’s service records do not include a certificate of completeness (DD Form 2963) and that the RO did not request one. Therefore, the Board finds that a remand is necessary to ensure that the Veteran’s complete service treatment and personnel records have been associated with her claims file. Regarding the Veteran’s claim for PTSD, she maintains that she was sexually assaulted at Lackland Airforce Base during a period of ACDUTRA from June 10, 2012, to June 26, 2012. A review of the record indicates that she was not provided with the notice regarding alternative sources of evidence that may constitute credible supporting evidence of a stressor involving personal assault. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f)(5) (2018). Therefore, the Board finds that a remand is necessary so that notice can be provided. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Ensure that a complete copy of the Veteran’s service treatment and personnel records have been associated with the claims file and request that the appropriate authority certify the completeness (DD Form 2963) of the Veteran’s service treatment records. 2. Provide the Veteran a notice letter in connection with her claim for service connection for PTSD based on in-service personal assault. The letter should (1) inform her of the information and evidence that is necessary to substantiate the PTSD claim based on personal assault; (2) inform her about the information and evidence that VA will seek to provide; and (3) inform her about the information and evidence that she is expected to provide. Specifically, this letter should be compliant with 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f), advising the Veteran of specific examples of alternative forms of evidence to corroborate her account of an in-service assault and that behavioral changes may constitute credible supporting evidence of the stressor. She should thereafter be provided the opportunity to furnish this type of evidence and/or to advise VA of potential sources of such evidence. 3. Identify and obtain any pertinent, outstanding VA and private treatment records and associate them with the claims file. This should include the hospital where the Veteran states she was taken in May 2013. See March 2016 NOD. 4. After undertaking any other development found to be warranted, readjudicate the issues on appeal. If a decision is adverse to the Veteran, issue a supplemental statement of the case and allow appropriate time for response. Then, return the case to the Board. Kristin Haddock Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD S. Mishalanie, Counsel