Citation Nr: 21068613 Decision Date: 11/10/21 Archive Date: 11/10/21 DOCKET NO. 17-17 636 DATE: November 10, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from June 1954 to December 1957. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2015 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). This matter was previously remanded by the Board in June 2018. Entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD, is remanded. The Veteran is seeking service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD. The Veteran contends that he was exposed to traumatic experiences as a medical technician and first responder while serving in the Air Force. Specifically, the Veteran asserts that his in-service stressor occurred when he arrived on the scene of a multi-car accident which had resulted in several fatalities and serious injuries. The Veteran assisted in collecting casualties and body parts and transported them to the morgue. In June 2015, VA contacted the Joint Services Records Research Center (JSRRC) requesting stressor verification, indicating that the Veteran was assigned to the 357 Fighter Interceptor Group from January 1955 to December 1957. The JSRRC responded in October 2015 that they were unable to corroborate the Veteran's in-service stressors based on the information provided. Additionally, based on the aforementioned information provided by VA, the Defense Personnel Records Information Retrieval System (DPRIS) responded that the 357 Fighter Interceptor Group was not a valid unit designation and instead provided information on the 357th Fighter Interceptor Squadron (FIS) and the 316th Air Division (AD). In the June 2018 Board remand, the Board noted that VA provided inaccurate information for the searches, noting that the Veteran was a member of 337th Group and not the 357th Group. A November 2019 DPRIS response indicated that the available January 1957 through March 1957 unit history submitted by the 316th AD, higher headquarters for the 357th FIS stationed at Nouasseur Air Station (AS) Morocco was researched. It was noted that the history was negative and did not report on the Veteran, or unit personnel assigned to the 357th FIS assisting individuals from a multi-car accident during the January through March 1957 time frame, and that information concerning the Veteran's assigned duty station's locations and duty assignment descriptions should be located in his Air Force (AF) Form 7, and in his AF Form 75 (USAF Airman's Performance Report). Regrettably, it is not clear that accurate information was used to corroborate the Veteran's claimed in-service stressors. The November 2019 DPRIS response indicated that the research consisted of the available January 1957 through March 1957 unit history submitted by the 316th AD, higher headquarters for the 357th FIS stationed at Nouasseur AS Morocco. However, as noted in the June 2018 Board remand, the Veteran was assigned to 337 USAF Hospital (ADC) Portland Intl. Airport, Portland, OR. Accordingly, remand is warranted so that VA may attempt to verify the Veteran's in-service stressors. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: (Please note, this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c). Expedited handling is requested.) 1. Contact the Veteran and afford him the opportunity to identify or submit any additional pertinent evidence in support of his claimed in-service stressors, specifically to include the stressors regarding his six-week hospitalization in 1956, responding to a multi-car accident, and the open-heart surgery performed on the Veteran's base commander who ultimately passed away due to the unsanitary conditions during the operation. The Veteran should be asked to provide dates, locations, and names of persons associated with these events, to include any diagnoses made during his 1956 hospitalization. 2. Thereafter, take the appropriate steps to attempt to verify the Veteran's claimed PTSD stressors, including his claimed PTSD stressors while assigned to 337 USAF Hospital (ADC) Portland Intl. Airport, Portland, OR between 1954 and 1957, including his claimed six-week hospitalization in 1956, his reported work responding to a multi-car accident, and the reported assistance with open heart surgery and subsequent death of the base commander. If the search for corroborating records leads to negative results, a formal finding as to the unavailability of records must be made. Notify the Veteran and allow him the opportunity to respond. 3. Once the above development has been completed, to the extent possible, schedule the Veteran for a VA mental health examination. The examiner is asked to review the pertinent records and obtain a history from the Veteran as to the progression of his mental health symptoms. Upon review of the file, interview of the Veteran and examination, the examiner should address each of the following: (a) The examiner should clearly identify all current psychiatric disabilities. (b) Specifically, if PTSD is diagnosed, please discuss the stressor or stressors upon which the diagnosis is based. The examiner should specifically opine as to whether PTSD is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) related to his active service including the Veteran's claimed in-service stressors. (c) For any acquired psychiatric disorder other than PTSD, opine as to whether it is at least as likely as not the disability had onset in, or is otherwise related to his service, to include his claimed in-service stressors. The examiner is asked to explain the reasons behind any opinions expressed and conclusions reached. Lay contentions must be considered and weighed in making the determination as to whether a nexus exists. 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. Bethany L. Buck Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board David M. Sebstead, Associate 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.