BVA9500442 
DOCKET NO.  93-08 392     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Manchester, New
Hampshire

THE ISSUE

Entitlement to a 100 percent schedular evaluation for
schizophrenia.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: New Hampshire State Veterans
Council

WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL

Appellant

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Joseph M. Horrigan, Counsel

INTRODUCTION

The veteran served on active duty from August 1972 to January
1973.  This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals
(Board) from a June 1990 rating decision from the Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Manchester, New
Hampshire.

REMAND

The record indicates that the veteran may have received treatment
in recent years for his psychiatric disorder but no clinical
documentation is in the claims folder.  The Board also notes that
he last received a VA psychiatric examination in December 1991.

In view of the foregoing and given the duty to assist the veteran
in the development of his claim under 38 U.S.C.A. 5107(a) (West
1991), this case is REMANDED to the RO for the following
development:

1.  The RO should request the veteran to
provide the names, addresses, and
approximate dates of treatment of all VA
and Non VA health care providers from whom
he sought treatment for his psychiatric
symptomatology from 1990 to the present.
When the veteran responds and provides any
necessary authorizations, the RO should
request copies of all pertinent clinical
records.  These records should include all
documentation from the physician identified
as Dr. Standow.  All records received
should be associated with the claims
folder.

2.  Thereafter, the veteran should be
accorded a VA psychiatric examination to
determine the severity of his psychiatric
disorder.  The claims folder must be made
available to the examining physician prior
to the evaluation so that the pertinent
clinical records may be studied in detail.
Distinction must be made between the
service-connected psychosis and conditions
which are of developmental or congenital
origin.  Personality disorders should be
fully described and classified.  The
psychiatrist should utilize any
psychological testing deemed pertinent in
making a complete diagnostic evaluation and
in differentiating the service-connected
psychosis from the personality disorders.
Based upon a review of the record and the
examination, the physician should provide a
Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF)
Score indicating the level of impairment
produced by the service-connected
psychosis.  It is imperative that the
examiner also provide a definition of the
GAF score.

3.  When the above development has been
completed the RO should readjudicate the
veteran's claim.  The rating should reflect
consideration of 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.321(b)(1)
and 4.16(c).

If the benefits sought on appeal remain denied, the veteran and
his representative should be provided a supplemental statement of
the case and afforded a reasonable opportunity to respond.
Thereafter, the case should be returned to this Board for its
further consideration, if otherwise appropriate.

          GARY L. GICK
          Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals

(CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE)

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 deter-
mination.  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 action has been taken in
accordance with the Veterans' Benefits Improvements Act of 1994,
Pub. L. No. 103-446, § 303, 108 Stat. 4645, ___ (1994), and 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).