Citation Nr: 21075903 Decision Date: 12/21/21 Archive Date: 12/21/21 DOCKET NO. 12-03 890 DATE: December 21, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial rating greater than 70 percent for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from December 1963 to June 1975. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2009 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Nashville, Tennessee. The Veteran testified before a Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) in March 2015. A hearing transcript is included in the file. When that VLJ was no longer employed with the Board, an April 2021 letter was sent requesting clarification whether the Veteran wanted a new hearing. The Veteran's attorney responded in May 2021 that the Veteran did not want another hearing on this matter. This appeal has been advanced on docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.900(c) (2017). 38 U.S.C. §§ 7107(a)(2). Although the Board regrets the additional delay, a remand is necessary to ensure that due process is followed and there is a complete record upon which to decide the Veteran's claim so that he is afforded every possible consideration. See 38 U.S.C. § 5103A; 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c). This matter was most recently before the Board in June 2021, wherein the Board remanded the issue for the RO to obtain Vet Center treatment records from 2010 and onwards. The matter has returned to the Board for adjudication. Unfortunately, the development directed in the last remand was not accomplished for the reasons described below. The law mandates that where the remand orders of the Board or the Court are not complied with, the Board errs as a matter of law when it fails to ensure compliance. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. 268, 271 (1998). In this regard, the June 2021 Board decision found that the Veteran's records from the Chattanooga Vet Center from 2010 were not obtained. The Board remanded the issue so that the RO could obtain these records. In July 2021, the RO sent the Veteran a development letter that requested he send a VA Form 21-4142, Authorization to Disclose Information to the Department of Veterans Affairs and VA Form 21-4142(a), General Release for Medical Provider Information to the Department of Veterans Affairs. The RO did not specify that he should return the forms specifically for the Vet Center. In August 2021, the Veteran's attorney responded that he was trying to get records and will forward them upon receipt. In a September 2021 correspondence, the Veteran's attorney noted that a completed VA Form 21-4142 is not needed for the Vet Center as it is a VA medical facility. The Board notes that even though Vet Center records may be considered Federal records, Vet Center records are often stored separately from VA treatment records and must be requested from the specific Vet Center. These records are not retrievable through CAPRI because the Vet Center provides mental health services that are protected under HIPAA. On remand, the records from Chattanooga Vet Center dating from 2010 to present should be obtained. Updated release forms are required as it appears that the address for the Chattanooga Vet Center has changed since the time they were last requested. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain additional VA medical treatment records from November 2021 to present. All reasonable attempts should be made to obtain any identified records. 2. The Veteran should be afforded the opportunity to submit any Chattanooga Vet Center records from 2010 to present. Instruct the Veteran to provide those records or in the alternative, provide a release so that VA can attempt to obtain those records. All attempts to secure this evidence must be documented in the claims file, and if, after making reasonable efforts to obtain named records, they are not able to be secured, provide the required notice and opportunity to respond to the Veteran and his representative. Vet Center records are Federal records and efforts to secure such must continue until obtained or certified to be unavailable. MARJORIE A. AUER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board E. Kim, 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.