BVA9504796 DOCKET NO. 92-00 549 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in San Juan, Puerto Rico THE ISSUE Entitlement to an increased evaluation for low back disability, currently rated as 20 percent disabling. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Puerto Rico Public Advocate for Veterans Affairs WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD J. W. Loeb, Counsel REMAND The veteran served on active duty for training from July 1962 to December 1962 and on active duty from May 1984 to October 1989. This case was remanded in August 1992 by the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in San Juan, Puerto Rico for additional actions, to include neurologic examination and adjudication of the inextricably intertwined issue of entitlement to a total rating based on unemployability. A review of the claims file reveals that although the veteran was examined by VA in September 1992, and a March 1994 rating decision denied a total rating based on unemployability, the veteran has not been advised of his appellate rights with respect to this denial. Additionally, the Board notes that outpatient records from Ryder Memorial Hospital, which are dated from October 1993 to February 1994 and refer to the veteran's back disability, were received by the Board without being considered by the RO and without a written waiver from the veteran of RO consideration. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1304(c) (1994). Moreover, there are untranslated statements on file from the veteran. Consequently, this case is REMANDED to the RO for the following development: 1. The veteran should be advised of his appellate rights with respect to the March 1994 denial of his total rating claim. 2. The veteran should be requested to provide the names, addresses, and approximate dates of treatment for all health care providers who have treated him in recent years for back disability. When the requested information and any necessary authorization have been received, the RO should attempt to obtain copies of all indicated records, which have not previously been secured. The health care providers contacted should include Dr. Hector J. Cases. In any event, the RO should obtain copies of any additional VA records pertaining to treatment of the veteran's back. 3. The veteran should again be asked to provide a complete work history since June 1991, which is when he indicated on his August 1993 claim for unemployability that he lasted worked full time. This history should include any full or part-time employment, to include the name of the employer, the type of work, and the hours worked per week, and any attempts to obtain employment if he has not worked. 4. All untranslated evidence on file, including statements from the veteran received by VA in February, March, and October 1994, should be translated into English. 5. The veteran should be afforded VA orthopedic and neurology examinations by board certified specialists, if available, to determine the current severity of his service-connected low back disability. All necessary tests and studies, including X- ray studies, should be conducted, and all findings should be reported in detail. The examiners should also provide their opinions as to the impact of the low back disability on the veteran's ability to work. The rationale for all opinions expressed should be fully explained. The claims folder must be made available to the examiners for review before their examinations of the veteran. 6. Thereafter, the RO should undertake any other indicated development and readjudicate the claim for an increased evaluation for low back disability based upon all evidence received since the March 1994 rating decision. If a notice of disagreement on the total rating issue is received, that issue should also be readjudicated. If the benefit sought on appeal is not granted to the veteran's satisfaction or if a timely notice of disagreement is received with respect to any other matter, including the disposition of the claim for a total rating based upon unemployability, the veteran and his representative should be provided a supplemental statement of the case on all issues in appellate status. The case should then be returned to the Board, if otherwise in order. By this remand, the Board intimates no opinion as to any final outcome warranted. The veteran need take no action until he is otherwise notified. SHANE A. DURKIN 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) (1994).