BVA9504539 
DOCKET NO.  92-53 683     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Cleveland, Ohio

THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to an increased evaluation for anxiety reaction
currently rated 50 percent disabling.

2.  Entitlement to a total rating for compensation purposes on
the basis of individual unemployability.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: Veterans of Foreign Wars of the
United States

WITNESSES AT HEARINGS ON APPEAL

Appellant and spouse

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Wayne A. Tonkins, Associate Counsel

INTRODUCTION

The veteran had active service from January 1944 to August 1945.

This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals
(hereinafter the Board) on appeal from a rating decision in 1989
from the Cleveland, Ohio, Regional Office (hereinafter RO) which
continued a 50 percent disability evaluation for anxiety
reaction.

In September 1992, the Board remanded this appeal to the RO to
formally consider, by a rating action, the issue of a total
rating for compensation purposes based upon individual
unemployability.

REMAND

The appellant contends that an increased evaluation for anxiety
reaction is warranted since this disorder is more severely
disabling than the current 50 percent evaluation reflects.
Specifically, the veteran asserts that he can become stable most
of the time with medication but even with medication he can
become very nervous and upset.

The appellant further contends that a total disability evaluation
on the basis of individual unemployability is warranted, since he
cannot be gainfully employed because of his service-connected
disability.  Specifically, he asserts that he was forced to
retire early because of his service-connected anxiety disorder
and he could not cope with any situation in a business
environment because of his severe impairment, consisting of not
getting along with anyone.

In reviewing the record, this Board member notes that the
veteran's accredited representative asserts that recent VA
examinations were inadequate.  The examiner stated in the
December 1993 examination that without past examinations he could
only speculate on certain aspects of the veteran's mental
condition which suggests the examiner did not have the veteran's
claims file available for review prior to or during the
examination.  The accredited representative requested the Board
to remand the case to the RO for further development consistent
with the current Court of Veterans Appeals decisions pertaining
to the VA's duty to assist the veteran and consistent with
providing the veteran a thorough and contemporaneous medical
examination.

In view of the foregoing, it is necessary to REMAND this case for
the following action:

The RO should afford the veteran a
psychiatric examination consistent with the
appropriate Physician's Guide for
Disability Evaluation Examinations to
determine the nature and extent of his
anxiety reaction.  Any indicated
specialized examinations and diagnostic
studies should be conducted.  The claims
file must be made available to the examiner
for review prior to the examination.  The
examiner must assign a Global Assessment of
Functioning Score and explain what the
score represents, and indicate how the
veteran's psychiatric disability impacts
upon his ability to work.

When the above development has been completed, the case should
again be reviewed by the RO.  If the decision remains adverse to
the veteran, he and his representative should be furnished a
supplemental statement of the case and afforded a reasonable
period to respond.  Thereafter, subject to current appellate
procedures, the case should be returned to the Board for further
appellate consideration, if appropriate.

The veteran need take no action unless he is further informed.
The purpose of this REMAND is to obtain additional evidence and
no inference should be drawn regarding the final disposition of
the claim.

          E. W. SEERY
          Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals

The Board of Veterans' Appeals Administrative Procedures
Improvement Act, Pub. L. No. 103-271, § 6, 108 Stat. 740, ___
(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) (1993).