BVA9500683 DOCKET NO. 93-12 522 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Newark, New Jersey THE ISSUE Entitlement to an increased (compensable) evaluation for dissociative disorder, REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: New Jersey Department of Military and Veterans' Affairs ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD M. Auer, Counsel REMAND The veteran served on active duty from July 1964 to December 1965. This appeal arises from a December 1992 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), Newark, New Jersey, Regional Office (RO). In that decision, it was noted that a noncompensable evaluation was assigned for dissociative disorder based on a review of the veteran's service medical records only, because the veteran failed to report for a scheduled VA examination. In a statement dated in April 1993, the veteran indicated that he had been examined at the VA medical center at East Orange, New Jersey, on August 3, 1992. He reported that he received an orthopedic examination by Dr. Alfred J. Krug, a general examination by Dr. Blaszka, and a psychiatric examination by Dr. Tardiman. A report of a VA examination conducted in August 1992 is not in the claims file. In his VA Form 9 (substantive appeal), dated in October 1993, the veteran claimed that he suffers from major depression as a result of his military service and that he is totally disabled as a result of this disorder. In the rating decision of December 1992, the RO allowed service connection for dissociate disorder but denied service connection for dysthymic disorder. In a letter dated in January 1993, the RO notified the veteran that service connection for chronic depression was established and that service connection for dysthymic disorder was denied. The veteran's case was received at the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) in June 1993. Since that time, additional evidence in the form of VA outpatient treatment records and private medical records have been received. This additional evidence was received without a waiver of the veteran's right to have that evidence initially considered by the RO. Any pertinent evidence submitted by the veteran or representative that is accepted by the Board must be referred to the RO for review and preparation of a supplemental statement of the case, unless this procedural right is waived by the appellant. See 38 C.F.R. § 20.1304(c) (1993). The veteran has not waived this procedural right and, in view of other necessary developments described below, this claim must be returned to the RO for consideration of the evidence submitted directly to the Board. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. The RO should contact the veteran and ask him to furnish the names and addresses of all medical personnel and facilities from whom he has received treatment for the disabilities at issue since his discharge from service. After obtaining the necessary authorization from the veteran, the RO should obtain available records from the named sources. Care should be taken by the RO so that duplicate records are not placed in the claims folder. 2. The RO should obtain any available treatment records from the VA hospitals or medical centers where the veteran has received treatment since his discharge from service. Care should be taken by the RO so that duplicate records are not placed in the claims folder. 3. The veteran should be accorded a psychiatric examination to determine the severity of the service-connected dissociative disorder and the nature and etiology of any other psychiatric pathology that may be present. The examination should be conducted in accordance with Chapter 14 of the VA Physician's Guide for Disability Evaluations (1985). All symptoms attributable to the service-connected dissociative disorder should be identified, and, if possible, be distinguished from those attributable to any coexisting psychopathology which is identified. Any identified coexisting pathology should be described in detail. If it is felt that any coexisting disorder is causally related to the service-connected dissociative disorder or to the veteran's military service, such an opinion and the bases therefor should be set forth in detail. A comprehensive report, with attention to the history of the veteran's disability, should be provided. The examiner should assess the social, industrial, and functional impairment associated with the veteran's dissociative disorder by utilizing the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale found in the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. The examiner should also set forth an opinion, in light of the veteran's history and current symptomatology, regarding the effect his service-connected dissociative disorder has on his ability to obtain and retain employment. It is imperative that the claims folder in this case be made available to the examiner for review prior to the examination. 4. Thereafter, the RO should review the veteran's claims in light of all the evidence. The rating should reflect consideration of the veteran's claim to be unemployable as the result of his service-connected psychiatric disorder in light of the provisions of 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.321(b)(1) and 4.16(b) or 4.16(c). If any claim remains denied, the veteran and his representative should be provided with a supplemental statement of the case that summarizes the evidence and sets forth the reasons for the adverse decision. The appropriate response time should be allowed. The case should be returned to the Board, if in order, after compliance with all regulatory appellate procedures. No action is required of the veteran until he is so informed. The Board intimates no opinion as to the ultimate decision warranted in this case, pending completion of the requested development. GARY L. GICK 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 deter- mination. 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 action has been taken in accordance with the Veterans' Benefits Improvements Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-446, § 303, 108 Stat. 4645, ___ (1994), and 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).