BVA9508156 DOCKET NO. 93-17 146 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania THE ISSUE Entitlement to an increased evaluation for schizophrenia, currently evaluated as 70 percent disabling. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Suzie St. Vil, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from October 1974 to February 1976. He has been represented throughout his appeal by the Disabled American Veterans. This matter came before the Board of Veterans' appeals (hereinafter Board) on appeal from a rating decision of January 1991, by the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Regional Office (RO), which denied the veteran's claim for an increased rating for schizophrenia. The appeal was received at the Board in August 1993. REMAND The veteran contends, in effect, that he is entitled to an increased evaluation for his service-connected schizophrenia. It is maintained that disability due to the veteran's schizophrenia is more severe than is currently reflected by the 70 percent rating. The service representative points out that the veteran has had numerous periods of hospitalizations for evaluation of chronic symptoms of his schizophrenia, and he has been unable to obtain or maintain gainful employment. The service representative asserts that the records reflect that the veteran has been socially isolated and there is gross repudiation of reality with disturbed and behavior processes which affect all his daily activities. Therefore, it is argued that a 100 percent rating is more appropriate for the veteran's schizophrenia. The service representative further argues that the RO erred in not considering the provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(c) in evaluating the veteran's psychiatric disorder. In reviewing the record, the Board observes that the most recent Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) examination for evaluation of the veteran's psychiatric disorder was conducted in September 1991. At that time, it was noted that the veteran had not been employed since military service. The veteran also indicated that he had no significant relationships and he had relatively few social contacts. Of record is a VA hospital summary indicating that the veteran was admitted to a hospital in September 1992 with complaints of increased hallucinations and psychotic symptoms. It was indicated that the veteran had a history of noncompliance with medication and alcohol abuse. It was reported that the veteran had recently served time in the county jail on charges of intoxication and resisting arrest. The attending physician also reported that the veteran had a history of suicide attempts; it was indicated that he had had an overdose of medication as recently as six weeks prior to his current admission. The discharge diagnoses were schizo-affective disorder and alcohol dependence. Received at the Board in March 1994 was a VA hospital report which shows that the veteran reported to the hospital on March 8, 1994, complaining that his mood was not good; he also reported that he had been under a lot of stress and he had been feeling suicidal in the past week. The diagnoses were schizo-affective disorder in remission for Community Maintenance Program and alcohol abuse, episodic. In light of the foregoing, and in keeping with VA's duty to assist the veteran in the development of his claim, 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. § 3.103(a) (1994), the Board finds that further development is in order prior to appellate disposition of this case. Accordingly, the Board hereby REMANDS this case to the RO for the following actions: 1. All VA treatment records for the veteran since January 1992 should be obtained and added to the claims folder. 2. The RO should arrange for the veteran to undergo a social and industrial survey, in order to obtain information as to the veteran's social and industrial adaptability. These records should be included in the veteran's claims folder. 3. Thereafter, the veteran should be afforded a psychiatric examination in order to determine the nature and severity of his psychiatric disorder. The examination should be conducted in accordance with VA's Physician's Guide for Disability Evaluation Examinations. Any psychological testing deemed necessary to make a complete diagnostic evaluation should be accomplished. The claims folder, including the above development, should be made available to the examiner prior to the examination. 4. After the above actions have been accomplished, the case should again be reviewed by the RO and appropriate action taken. The rating decision should reflect consideration of any new evidence, including the hospital summary received at the Board in March 1994, and all potentially applicable criteria, to include consideration of the provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 4.16. 5. If the decision remains adverse to the veteran, both he and his representative should be furnished a supplemental statement of the case which summarizes the pertinent evidence and reflects detailed reasons and bases for the decision. They should then be afforded the applicable time period in which to respond. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board further appellate consideration, if otherwise in order. No action is required of the veteran until he receives further notice. By this REMAND the Board intimates no opinion, either legal or factual, as to the ultimate determination warranted in this case. The purpose of this REMAND is to further develop the record and to afford the veteran due process of law. EUGENE A. O'NEILL 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 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).