BVA9500042 
DOCKET NO.  93- 10 360    )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St. Petersburg,
Florida

THE ISSUES

1.  Whether new and material evidence has been submitted to
reopen a claim of entitlement to service connection for diabetes
mellitus.

2.  Entitlement to an increased evaluation for coronary artery
disease, with quintuple bypass surgery and hypertension, status
post myocardial infarctions.

3.  Entitlement to a total disability evaluation based on
individual unemployability due to service connected disabilities.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: Veterans of Foreign Wars of the
United States

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

James A. Frost, Associate Counsel

REMAND

The veteran served on active duty from January 1965 to April
1971.

This appeal arises from rating decisions in April 1991 and
January 1992 by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) regional
office (RO) in St. Petersburg, Florida.

VA has a duty to assist the veteran in the development of facts
pertinent to his claim.  38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a).  The United
States Court of Veterans Appeals (the Court) has held that,
although a decision by the Social Security Administration (SSA)
regarding an appellant's unemployability is not controlling for
VA determinations, it is "pertinent" to such a claim and is
relevant to the determination of the appellant's ability to
secure and follow a substantially gainful occupation.  At a
minimum, the decision of an administrative law judge of SSA is
evidence which cannot be ignored and, to the extent that its
conclusions are not accepted, reasons and bases should be given
therefor.  Murincsak v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 63 (1992).

The veteran, through his representative, has argued that
consideration of a decision in August 1991 by an administrative
law judge of SSA, which awarded him Social Security disability
benefits, should lead VA to allow his individual unemployability
claim.  A review of the record reveals that the veteran requested
several times that the RO consider the SSA decision and that,
along with other documents, he submitted 2 pages of a multipage
SSA decision.  The veteran's claims file does not contain a
complete copy of the SSA decision or of the evidence on which it
was based.  The Board therefore finds that, to comply with the
Court's decision in Murincsak, VA should obtain the SSA records
prior to a final disposition of the veteran's individual
unemployability claim.

In addition, with reference to the veteran's claim for an
increased rating for a cardiovascular disorder, the Board notes
that the most recent VA medical examination was in June 1992.
Furthermore, there is a question as to the level of the
functional impairment imposed on the veteran by his service
connected cardiovascular disorder as opposed to non-service
connected diabetes mellitus and chronic obstructive pulmonary
disease.  The Board therefore finds that an up-to-date VA medical
examination should be conducted prior to the final disposition of
both the increased rating and individual unemployability claims.

Accordingly, this case is REMANDED to the RO for the following:

1.  The RO should request that the veteran
identify each physician and medical
facility, VA or non-VA, which has rendered
medical treatment to him since June 1992.
The RO should attempt to obtain copies of
all such clinical records.

2.  The RO should request that SSA provide
copies of the administrative law judge's
August 1991 decision and of the evidence on
which it was based.

3.  The RO should schedule the veteran for
a medical examination.  The examiner should
determine the current symptomatology
attributable to cardiovascular disease,
diabetes mellitus and chronic obstructive
pulmonary disease.  The examiner should, to
the extent possible, offer an opinion as to
the impairment of the activities of daily
living and of working ability which is
solely imposed by cardiovascular disease
without reference to diabetes or lung
disease.  The claims folder should be made
available to the examiner for review prior
to the examination.

Following completion of these actions, the RO should review the
evidence and determine whether the veteran's increased rating and
individual unemployability claims may now be granted.  If the
decision remains adverse to the veteran, he and his
representative should be provided with an appropriate
Supplemental Statement of the Case and an opportunity to respond
thereto.  The case should then be returned to the Board for
further appellate consideration.  The purposes of this REMAND are
to assist the veteran in the development of his claim and to
procure clarifying medical information.  Appellate review of the
remaining issue on appeal is deferred, pending completion of this
REMAND.  No action is required of the veteran until he receives
further notice.

          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 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) (1993).