BVA9501930 DOCKET NO. 93-09 224 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Wichita, Kansas THE ISSUE Entitlement to an increased evaluation for dysthymic disorder, currently evaluated as 30 percent disabling. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Kenneth M. Carpenter, Attorney ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Ronald R. Bosch, Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from June 1978 to October 1988. This appeal arose from a January 1993 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Wichita, Kansas. The RO assigned a temporary total convalescence evaluation for dysthymic disorder effective from April 1, 1991, to November 30, 1992; and reinstated the previous 30 percent evaluation effective December 1, 1992. The case has been forwarded to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) for appellate review. REMAND Service connection has been granted for dysthymic disorder, evaluated as 30 percent disabling; residuals of a right shoulder injury, evaluated as 20 percent disabling; residuals of a low back injury, evaluated as 10 percent disabling; residuals of a fracture of the left great toe, bilateral high frequency sensorineural hearing loss, and a nail through the right hand between the right index and middle fingers, each evaluated noncompensable. In his February 1993 notice of disagreement, and April 1993 appeal statement, the veteran requested a total disability evaluation for compensation on the basis of individual unemployability. This issue cannot satisfactorily be dissociated from the prepared and certified issue of entitlement to an increased evaluation for dysthymic disorder. Associated with the claim's file subsequent to a forwarding of the veteran's case to the Board for appellate review was a substantial quantity of medical records and other documentation including a VA hospital discharge summary pertaining to treatment of the veteran from January to June 1994, and correspondence notifying him of an award of Social Security Disability Benefits. This evidence has not been evaluated by the RO. The veteran was not examined by VA in connection with his claim for increased compensation benefits. The medical records pertaining to treatment the veteran may have received subsequent to his most recent hospitalization at the local VA medical facility have not been associated with the claims file. An application for increased compensation on the basis of unemployability (VA Form 21-8940) is not on file. A social and industrial survey has not been conducted. The medical records utilized to award the veteran Social Security Disability Benefits are not on file. Association with the appellate record of the foregoing pertinent evidence and contemporaneous VA examinations would materially assist in the adjudication of the claimant's appeal. Pursuant to VA's duty to assist the veteran in the development of facts pertinent to his claim under 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. § 3.103(a) (1993), a final decision is being deferred pending a REMAND of the case to the RO for the following development: 1. The RO should request and associate with the claims file photocopies of the complete records pertaining to the veteran's treatment since June 1994 at the VA Medical Center in Topeka, Kansas. 2. The RO should provide the veteran with an application for increased compensation on the basis of unemployability (VA Form 21-8940) for completion, return, and association with the claims file. 3. The RO should contact the Social Security Administration and request it to furnish photocopies of all medical records pertinent to the veteran's award of disability benefits. If medical evidence utilized in processing such claim is not available, that fact should be entered in the claims file. 4. The RO should conduct a social and industrial survey. Family members, former coworkers, members of the community, and the veteran should be interviewed. The individual conducting the survey should express an opinion with complete rationale as to the impact of the veteran's service- connected disabilities on his ability to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation. 5. The veteran should be scheduled for orthopedic, audiology, and ear, nose and throat examinations by VA to determine the extent of severity of residuals of injuries of his right shoulder, low back, and left great toe; right hand disability; and bilateral high frequency sensorineural hearing loss. The examinations are to be conducted in accordance with Chapters 2 and 3 of the VA Physician's Guide for Disability Evaluation Examinations. All indicated studies are to be conducted. 6. After completing all of the foregoing actions, the RO should schedule the veteran for an examination by a VA psychiatrist to determine the extent of severity of dysthymic disorder. The examination is to be conducted in accordance with the diagnostic procedures outlined in Chapter 14 of the VA Physician's Guide for Disability Evaluation Examinations. All indicated studies including psychological studies should be accomplished. The psychiatrist should assess the impact of dysthymic disorder and service-connected disabilities in general on the veteran's ability to obtain and maintain gainful employment. The report of examination should include a complete rationale for all opinions expressed. The examiner should assign a numerical code under the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale, and include a definition of the numerical code assigned. The entire claims file and a copy of this REMAND must be made available to and reviewed by the examiner prior to the examination. 7. After undertaking any development deemed appropriate in addition to that specified above, the RO should readjudicate the issue of entitlement to an increased evaluation for dysthymic disorder, and adjudicate the issue of entitlement to a total evaluation for compensation on the basis of individual unemployability. If the benefits requested on appeal are not granted to the veteran's satisfaction, or if he should timely file a notice of disagreement as to any other matter, the RO should issue a supplemental statement of the case for all issues in appellate status. A reasonable period of time for a response should be afforded. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board for final appellate review, if otherwise in order. By this REMAND, the Board intimates no opinion as to any final outcome warranted. No action is required of the veteran until he is notified by the RO. ALBERT D. TUTERA 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).