BVA9502365 DOCKET NO. 93-12 296 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Huntington, West Virginia THE ISSUE Entitlement to a permanent and total disability rating for pension purposes. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: The American Legion ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Jeffrey A. Pisaro, Counsel REMAND The veteran had active service from November 1966 to November 1970. This appeal arises from a June 1992 rating decision of the Huntington, West Virginia, Regional Office (RO). The veteran indicated in February 1992 that he had applied for Social Security Administration (SSA) disability benefits. As the Court of Veterans Appeals pointed out in Masors v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 181 (1992), SSA records may contain evidence which is pertinent to a veteran's claim of unemployability and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) must obtain copies of the records utilized by the SSA in determining the veteran's entitlement to disability benefits. The veteran was last afforded a VA examination in March 1992. At that time, pulmonary function studies were recommended but apparently not done. Subsequently, the veteran and his wife have both indicated that his pulmonary condition has increased in severity. The veteran also reported that a physician at the Huntington VA medical center had informed him that he had a liver disability. Under the circumstances of this case, the Board finds that further assistance is required. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED to the RO for the following actions: 1. The RO should obtain from the SSA a copy of any disability determination it has made for the veteran and copies of the medical records upon which any such determination was made. 2. The RO should contact the veteran and obtain the names and addresses of all health care providers where he has received treatment in recent years. Thereafter, the RO should obtain legible copies of all records which have not already been obtained, to include those from the Huntington VA medical center from July 1992 to the present. Once obtained, all records must be associated with the claims folder. 3. Following completion of the above development, the veteran should be afforded a VA general medical examination, and VA neurology, pulmonary, cardiovascular and liver examinations to determine the nature and extent of all disabilities present. The examinations should be broad enough to cover all diseases, injuries, and residual conditions which are suggested by the vet- eran's complaints, symptoms or findings at the time of examination. All complaints or symptoms having a medical cause should be covered by a definite diagnosis. Pulmonary function studies should be accomplished, as well as any other necessary tests or other recommended examinations. Clinical manifestations attributable to each disability should be reported in detail. The claims folder must be made available to the examiners prior to the examinations. Each examiner should render an opinion as to what effect the disabilities found have on the veteran's ability to work, and state whether the veteran's disabling conditions are susceptible to improvement through appropriate treatment. The factors upon which the medical opinions are based must be set forth. 4. When the above development has been completed, the case should again be reviewed by the RO and a rating action prepared which lists all of the veteran's disabilities and the percentage evaluation assigned each disability. The rating decision should also reflect consideration of the "average person" and the "unemployability" standards. 5. If the determination made is unfavorable to the veteran, the RO should provide the veteran with a supplemental statement of the case that sets forth the additional evidence, the rating assigned and the appropriate rating criteria for all disabilities of record, with a discussion of the applicability of the criteria to the veteran's disabilities; and which discusses the application of the two standards (average person and unemployability) by which a permanent and total disability rating for pension purposes may be assigned. 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 veteran need take no action until he is further informed. The purpose of this REMAND is to obtain additional information and to ensure due process of law. No inference should be drawn regarding the final disposition of the claim as a result of this action. 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).