BVA9505473 DOCKET NO. 93-16 486 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St. Petersburg, Florida THE ISSUE Entitlement to special monthly pension. ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Mark J. Swiatek, Counsel REMAND The veteran had honorable service from April 1943 to November 1945, March 1946 to August 1947, August 1948 to February 1950 and September 1951 to September 1953. He has had basic entitlement to pension since May 1974. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a January 1992 decision from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in St. Petersburg, Florida. The veteran asserts, in essence, that his disabilities are so severe that he requires the regular assistance of another person and is rendered housebound. He contends that he is legally blind which entitles him the aid and attendance benefit. The Board observes that the most recent examination of the appellant for an aid and attendance or housebound benefit determination was completed in October 1991. Mark D. McClintock, O.D., reported in April and May 1991 that at that time the veteran could be termed "legally blind". In a VA medical report of December 1991, it is noted that he lived in a trailer, but that without the help of neighbors he would be "severely handicapped". In the summary of a September 1992 VA hospital admission for chronic iritis of the right eye, it was noted that he was living with his daughter. The reports of subsequent VA medical treatment reflect several eye evaluations, with the reported visual acuity variable, but notably poorer than recorded on a January 1992 ophthalmology evaluation. In order to ensure that the VA has met its duty to assist the appellant with regard to developing the facts pertinent to a claim, and ensure due process, it is the opinion of the Board that further development as set forth below is desirable. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED to the RO for the following action: 1. The RO should request the appellant provide the names and addresses of all health care providers who have treated him recently for any disability. The RO should attempt to obtain copies of those treatment records identified by the appellant which have not been previously secured. This should include records from Mark D. McClintock, O.D., 102 Coastal Way, Jupiter, FL 33477. 2. Following completion of the above development, the appellant should be afforded a VA medical examination for the purpose of determining housebound status or permanent need for regular aid and attendance. The claims folder should be made available to the examiner prior to the examination. All indicated tests or special examinations should be accomplished to obtain an accurate assessment of the veteran's ability to care for himself or live alone. 3. When the above development has been completed, the RO should readjudicate the issue on appeal. If the decision remains adverse to the appellant, he and his representative, should one be appointed, should be furnished with a supplemental statement of the case and they should then be afforded the applicable time to respond. Thereafter, subject to current appellate procedures, the case should be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration, if appropriate. The appellant need take no action until he is further informed. The purpose of this REMAND is to obtain additional information and assure due process of law. No inference should be drawn regarding the final disposition of the claim as a result of this action. CHARLES E. HOGEBOOM 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 Improvement 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) (1994).