Citation Nr: 0007827 Decision Date: 03/23/00 Archive Date: 03/28/00 DOCKET NO. 97-29 332 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Winston-Salem, North Carolina THE ISSUE Entitlement to an increased rating for the service-connected generalized anxiety disorder, currently evaluated as 30 percent disabling. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: The American Legion ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Julie L. Salas, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from July 1947 to November 1948. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal of a June 1996 rating decision of the RO. REMAND The veteran contends that his generalized anxiety disorder is more disabling than the current rating indicates. As a preliminary matter, the Board finds that the veteran's claim for increased compensation benefits is "well grounded" within the meaning of 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a). The United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) has held that, when a veteran claims a service-connected disability has increased in severity, the claim is well grounded. Proscelle v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 629 (1992). When a veteran submits a well-grounded claim, VA must assist him in developing facts pertinent to that claim. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a). The veteran was afforded a VA psychiatric examination in April 1998. At that time, the veteran reported a long history of anxiety with spells of shakiness and panic and feelings of tightness in his chest and a lump in his stomach. He reported that he was receiving treatment for his anxiety disorder at the VA Medical Center in Fayetteville, but stated that he had not noticed much improvement in his condition under his current medications. He further noted that he had not worked for approximately the last 15 years. The final diagnosis was that of generalized anxiety disorder with an assigned Global Assessment of Functioning score of 51 which was stated to be in accordance with moderate to moderately severe psychiatric symptoms. Subsequent to the April 1998 VA examination, the veteran submitted additional evidence in the form of a statement dated in September 1999 which indicated that he was experiencing panic attacks at least three times a day, with most of them occurring at night. This evidence suggests that the veteran's condition worsened since the date of the most recent VA examination in April 1998. Hence, the Board finds that the veteran should be afforded another examination in order to evaluate the current severity of the service- connected generalized anxiety disorder. To ensure that VA has met its duty to assist the veteran in developing the facts pertinent to his claim and to ensure full compliance with due process requirements, the case is REMANDED to the RO for the following development: 1. The RO should request that the veteran identify the names, addresses, and approximate dates of treatment for all VA and non-VA health care providers who have treated him for his service- connected generalized anxiety disorder since April 1998. After securing the necessary release, the RO should attempt to obtain copies of pertinent treatment records identified by the veteran in response to this request and associate them with the claims folder. 2. The veteran should be afforded a special VA psychiatric examination in order to determine the current severity of his service-connected generalized anxiety disorder. All indicated testing in this regard should be accomplished. The claims folder should be made available to the examiner for review before the examination. Based on his/her review of the case, it is requested that the examiner provide a full multiaxial evaluation, including a score on the GAF scale on Axis V with an explanation of the score's meaning. In addition, it is requested that the examiner offer an opinion as to the degree of occupational and social impairment, including whether the veteran is precluded from performing substantially gainful employment, due to his service-connected generalized anxiety disorder. A complete rationale for all opinions expressed must be provided. 3. After undertaking any additional development deemed appropriate, the RO should review the veteran's claim. If any benefit sought on appeal is not granted to the veteran's satisfaction, then he and his representative should be issued a Supplemental Statement of the Case and afforded a reasonable opportunity to reply thereto. Thereafter, subject to current appellate procedures, the case should be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration, if appropriate. The veteran has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded to the regional office. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). In taking this action, the Board implies no conclusion as to any ultimate outcome warranted. This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment by the RO. The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner. See The Veterans' Benefits Improvements Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-446, § 302, 108 Stat. 4645, 4658 (1994), 38 U.S.C.A. § 5101 (West Supp. 1999) (Historical and Statutory Notes). In addition, VBA's Adjudication Procedure Manual, M21-1, Part IV, directs the ROs to provide expeditious handling of all cases that have been remanded by the Board and the Court. See M21-1, Part IV, paras. 8.44- 8.45 and 38.02-38.03. STEPHEN L. WILKINS Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 1991 & Supp. 1999), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. 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) (1999).