BVA9508170 DOCKET NO. 93-12 309 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Louisville, Kentucky THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to an increased rating for post-traumatic stress disorder, currently evaluated as 70 percent disabling. 2. Entitlement to a total rating based on individual unemployability as a result of service connected disabilities. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD J. L. Prichard, Associate Counsel REMAND The veteran had active duty from August 1960 to July 1975. The veteran contends that his post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) has increased in severity to such a degree as to merit a total evaluation. In addition, the veteran argues that his service connected disabilities combine to render him unemployable. By rating action of July 1985, service connection was granted for post-traumatic stress disorder, assigned a 30 percent evaluation from November 1984. The evaluation assigned was increased to 50 percent by rating action of January 1987, effective from November 1984. In a March 1992 rating action, a temporary total rating was assigned for hospitalization from June 1991; the 50 percent schedular evaluation was confirmed, effective from December 1991. The veteran's appeal is from this action. In a November 1992 rating action, a 70 percent evaluation was assigned, effective from December 1991. Accordingly, the issue for appellate consideration is entitlement to a rating in excess of 70 percent for post-traumatic stress disorder. A review of the record indicates that the veteran is in receipt of benefits from the Social Security Administration. However, neither a copy of the decision to award these benefits nor the medical records on which this decision was based are contained in the claims folder. The Court of Veterans Appeals held that, although a decision of the Social Security Administration is not controlling on the VA, it may well involve evidence which is relevant to the determination of his or her ability to secure and follow substantially gainful employment. Odiorne v. Principi, 3 Vet App. 456 (1992). Therefore, the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) believes that it is necessary to obtain these records. The veteran was most recently afforded a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) examination in October 1992. This examination did not include an evaluation of the veteran's PTSD on the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) Scale. The Board believes that such an evaluation would be helpful in reaching a decision in this case. In addition, the Board also believes that a social and industrial survey would be of great assistance in reaching a determination in this claim. The VA has a duty to assist the veteran in the development of facts pertinent to his claim. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107 (West 1991). To ensure that the VA has met its duty to assist the appellant in developing the facts pertinent to the claim, the case is remanded to the regional office (RO) for the following development: 1. The RO should obtain all treatment records pertaining to the treatment of the veteran's disabilities from January 1992 to the present and associate them with the claims folder. 2. The RO should obtain from the Social Security Administration the records pertinent to the appellant's claim for Social Security disability benefits, as well as the medical records relied upon concerning that claim. 3. The veteran should be afforded a VA psychiatric examination to determine the severity of his PTSD. The examiner should provide the veteran's score on the GAF Scale, as well as an explanation of that score. The examiner should also identify the symptomatology attributable to the veteran's post-traumatic stress disorder, if possible. Any other psychiatric disorder(s) found to be present should also be identified. The claims folder should be made available to the examiner for review before the examination. The examiner should note and explain factors pertaining to the veteran's employability. 4. The veteran should be afforded a VA social and industrial survey to assess his employment history and day-to-day functioning. A written copy of the report should be inserted into the claims folder. When this development has been completed, the claim should be reviewed by the RO. If any benefit sought on appeal is not granted, the appellant and his representative should be given a supplemental statement of the case with regard to the additional development and should also be afforded an opportunity to respond. The record should be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration, if in order. No action by the appellant or his representative is required until further notice is received. V. L. JORDAN 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).