Citation NR: 9621370 Decision Date: 07/31/96 Archive Date: 08/06/96 DOCKET NO. 94-33 460 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Indianapolis, Indiana THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder. 2. Entitlement to service connection for hearing loss. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Ronald R. Bosch, Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from July 1967 to November 1969. This appeal arose from a February 1991 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Indianapolis, Indiana. The RO, in relevant part, denied entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder and hearing loss. The RO affirmed the denial of entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder when it issued rating decisions in November 1991, January 1993, and November 1993. The RO affirmed the determinations previously entered when it issued a rating decision in July 1995. The case has been forwarded to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) for appellate review. REMAND A review of the record discloses that hearing loss was noted at entrance and separation from the veteran’s period of active service. Hearing loss was confirmed when the veteran was examined by VA in April 1990. The VA examiner did not express an opinion as to whether aggravation of preservice hearing loss occurred while the veteran was in service, or whether hearing loss currently shown was related to service on the basis of incurrence or aggravation. A contemporary VA audiology examination with opinions addressing the above issues would materially assist in the adjudication of the claimant’s appeal. Service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder requires medical evidence establishing a clear diagnosis of the disorder, credible supporting evidence that the claimed inservice stressor(s) actually occurred, and a link, established by medical evidence, between current symptomatology and the claimed inservice stressor. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f) (1994). In this regard, the veteran trained as a lineman and served a tour of duty with the United States Army in Vietnam. His decorations include a Vietnam Service Medal and a Vietnam Campaign Medal. The appellant is not shown to have been awarded a Purple Heart Medal, Combat Infantryman Badge, or other decoration reflective of combat activity. Stressor statements from the veteran on file are not as sufficiently detailed as they could be. The Board further notes that the stressor information which the veteran has supplied to the RO has not been referred to the United States Army and Joint Services Environmental Support Group (ESG) in an attempt to verify the claimed stressors. In this respect, the Board acknowledges that stressor information provided by the veteran is not sufficiently complete to permit the ESG to verify such stressor information. Nevertheless, the provisions of the VA Adjudication Procedure Manual M21-1 (Manual M21-1) pertaining to the adjudication of post-traumatic stress disorder provide that, “where records available to the rating board do not provide objective or supportive evidence of the alleged inservice traumatic stressor, it is necessary to develop this evidence.” Manual M21-1, Part VI, 7.46(f)(2) (emphasis added). Accordingly, as the development outlined in Manual M21-1 includes providing the information submitted by the veteran to the ESG, such development is mandatory. VA and non-VA medical health professionals have diagnosed the veteran with post-traumatic stress disorder. An examination based on a questionable history, however, is inadequate for rating purposes. West v. Brown, 7 Vet.App. 70, 77-8 (1994). Thus, it is necessary that the veteran be provided an examination where the examiner has an accurate and verified history of the appellant’s military service. Therefore, pursuant to VA’s duty to assist the veteran in the development of facts pertinent to his claims under 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. § 3.103(a) (1995), the Board will defer adjudication of the claimant’s appeal pending a remand of the case to the RO for further development as follows: 1. The RO should arrange for a VA audiology-ear disease examination of the veteran to determine the nature, extent of severity, and etiology of any ear disorder(s) which may be present. The examination is to be conducted in accordance with the diagnostic procedures outlined in the VA Physician’s Guide for Disability Evaluation Examinations. All indicated studies are to be conducted. The claims file must be made available to and reviewed by the examiner prior to the examination. The examiner must be requested to provide opinions as to whether hearing loss shown at entrance in service underwent aggravation during such service, and whether hearing loss presently shown is related to service on the basis of incurrence or aggravation. The opinions expressed must be accompanied by a complete rationale. 2. The RO should request from the veteran a statement containing as much detail as possible regarding any and all stressful events to which he was exposed in service. He should be asked to provide specific details of the claimed stressful events to the best of his ability. The veteran’s statement should include dates, places, detailed descriptions, units of service, duty assignments, as well as the names, units of assignment and any other identifying information concerning other individuals involved in the events. In this respect, the Board takes this opportunity to inform the veteran that the United States Court of Veterans Appeals (Court) has held that asking the veteran to provide the underlying facts, i.e., the names of individuals involved, the dates, and the places where the claimed events occurred, does not constitute an impossible or an onerous task. Wood v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 190, 193 (1991). 3. After obtaining the foregoing requested information from the appellant, the RO should forward it together with copies of the claimant’s obtained service personnel records and medical records, and a copy of his record of service (DD- 214) to the United States Army and Joint Services Environmental Support Group (ESG), Building 5089, Stop # 387, Fort Belvoir, Virginia 22060, in an attempt to verify any claimed stressor. Any information obtained is to be associated with the claims file. 4. Following receipt of the ESG’s report, and the completion of any additional development warranted or suggested by that agency, the RO should prepare a report detailing the nature of any combat action, or inservice stressful event, verified by the ESG. If no combat stressor has been verified, the RO should so state in its report. This report is then to be added to the claims folder. 5. Then, and only then, should the RO schedule the veteran for a psychiatric examination by a board of two VA psychiatrists who have not previously seen, examined, or treated him. The examination is to be conducted in accordance with the diagnostic procedures outlined in the VA Physician’s Guide for Disability Evaluation Examinations. All appropriate studies including post- traumatic stress disorder sub scales are to be performed. The claims file must be made available to and reviewed by the examiners prior to conduction and completion of the examinations. In determining whether or not the veteran has post-traumatic stress disorder due to an inservice stressor the examiners are hereby notified that only the verified history detailed in the reports provided by the ESG and/or the RO may be relied upon. If the examiners believe that post-traumatic stress disorder is the appropriate diagnosis they must specifically identify which stressor(s) detailed in the ESG’s and/or the RO’s report is/are responsible for that conclusion. Any and all opinions expressed must be accompanied by a complete rationale. The examiners must assign a Global Assessment of Functioning Score which is consistent with the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, and explain what the assigned score means. 6. Following completion of the foregoing the RO should review the claims file to ensure that all of the foregoing development has been completed in full. In particular, the RO should review the VA psychiatric examination report to verify that any diagnosis of post- traumatic stress disorder was based on the verified history provided by the ESG and/or the RO. If the examiners relied upon a history which was not verified, that examination report must be returned as inadequate for rating purposes. The Board emphasizes that the Court has held that a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder, related to service, based on an examination which relied upon an unverified history is inadequate. West, 7 Vet.App. at 77. 7. After undertaking any development deemed appropriate in addition to that specified above, the RO should readjudicate the issues of entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder and hearing loss. If the benefits requested on appeal are not granted to the veteran’s satisfaction, the RO should issue a supplemental statement of the case. A reasonable period of time for a response should be afforded. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board for final appellate review, if otherwise in order. By this remand, the Board intimates no opinion as to any final outcome warranted. No action is required of the veteran until he is notified by the RO. WARREN W. RICE, JR. Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals The Board of Veterans' Appeals Administrative Procedures Improvement Act, Pub. L. No. 103-271, § 6, 108 Stat. 740, 741 (1994), permits a proceeding instituted before the Board to be assigned to an individual member of the Board for a determination. This proceeding has been assigned to an individual member of the Board. Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 1991), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Veterans Appeals. This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (1995). - 2 -