Citation Nr: 21001067 Decision Date: 01/06/21 Archive Date: 01/06/21 DOCKET NO. 17-65 982 DATE: January 6, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 50 percent for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from October 1967 to October 1969. His awards and decorations include the Purple Heart Medal This case is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a November 2016 Regional Office (RO) rating decision. In that rating decision, the RO granted entitlement to service connection PTSD and assigned a 10 percent disability rating, effective April 5, 2016. The Veteran appeals the initial rating assigned for his PTSD and filed a timely substantive appeal following the RO’s Statement of the Case. The Veteran’s notice of disagreement (NOD) was received in March 2017. The RO issued a statement of the case (SOC) in October 2017. The Veteran’s VA Form 9, substantive appeal to the Board, was received in December 2017. In September 2019, the Veteran testified at a video conference hearing at the RO before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge sitting in Washington, DC. A transcript of the testimony is associated with the claims file. In September 2019, the Board granted an initial rating of 50 percent for service-connected PTSD processed through the Board’s “One-Touch” program. The Veteran appealed to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. In a May 2020 Order, the Court vacated the Board’s September 2019 decision denying an initial rating greater than 50 percent for PTSD and remanded the matter pursuant to a May 2020 Joint Motion for Remand (JMR). Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 50 percent for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded. The May 2020 JMR reveals that the parties agreed that the Board erred in its duty to assist when it failed to ensure that VA obtained treatment records from the Walla Walla Vet Center. As the September 2019 hearing, the Veteran testified that he had been attending group therapy at the center since April 2019. These records appeared to have not been obtained with the Board issuing its decision two days after the hearing. Accordingly, a remand is necessary to attempt to obtain any outstanding treatment records from the Walla Walla Vet Center. Furthermore, the Veteran testified at the September 2019 Board hearing that the September 2016 VA examination to evaluate his service connection claim for PTSD and the examiner did not ask detailed questions regarding his current PTSD symptoms. He felt that examination ended quickly after the examiner determined that the Veteran saw combat as a medica and the examination of symptoms of cursory. See Hearing Transcript at p. 10. In light of the foregoing, the Veteran should be provided with a new VA examination to evaluate the severity of his service-connected PTSD. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Request all outstanding treatment records pertaining to the Veteran’s PTSD from the Walla Walla Vet Center to include treatment from April 2019 to the present. A response, negative or positive, should be associated with the claims file. Requests 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. Arrange for the Veteran to undergo a VA examination to assess the current severity of his service-connected PTSD. The claims folder, including a copy of the REMAND, should be made available to and reviewed by the examiner in connection with the examination. The examiner should identify and discuss in detail all current manifestations/symptoms of the Veteran’s service-connected PTSD. The examiner should also provide an opinion concerning the current degree of social and occupational impairment resulting from the service-connected PTSD. A full rationale must be provided for all stated medical opinions. L. B. CRYAN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board B. Berry, Counsel The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.