BVA9505260 DOCKET NO. 93-06 486 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Chicago, Illinois THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to service connection for sleep apnea. 2. Entitlement to an increased disability rating for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with asthma, currently assigned a 60 percent disability evaluation. 3. Entitlement to an increased disability rating for peripheral arterial disease, currently assigned a 20 percent disability evaluation. 4. Entitlement to an increased disability rating for post- traumatic stress disorder, currently assigned a 10 percent disability evaluation. 5. Entitlement to special monthly compensation, based on the need for regular aid and attendance of another person or for being housebound. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL The appellant ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD P. H. Mathis, Counsel REMAND The veteran had active service from April 1963 to April 1967. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from rating decisions of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Chicago, Illinois. In June 1993, the representative forwarded rather extensive documentation to the Board in support of the veteran's claims, which has not been reviewed by the RO. Inasmuch as no waiver of initial review by the RO has been submitted, the case must be remanded for action by the RO for due process purposes. Also, in his substantive appeal of January 18, 1993, the veteran claimed benefits or increased benefits for multiple additional disabilities, including back pain, cervical spine deformity requiring the wearing of a neck collar, hypertension, congestive heart failure, nose and throat disability including rhinitis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, positive tuberculin skin test, peptic ulcer, disability of the shoulders and arms due to medication, allergies, and loss of sexual function. The veteran reported that he had been treated by the VA on numerous occasions; that he had been provided an electric cart by a prosthetic service; that he had worn back braces and stimulation units; and that despite all his treatment he had constant pain all day and had to hire people to care for him concerning everyday activities. Although the representative reported in June 1993 that the veteran had been contacted for clarification of the issues, the representative indicated that it was unclear as to exactly how many of these issues the veteran was pursuing. As a preliminary matter, the Board finds that the veteran's claims for increased evaluations for his service-connected disabilities are plausible and capable of substantiation, and thus well grounded within the meaning of 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991); see Proscelle v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 629 (1992) (a claim of entitlement to an increased evaluation of a service- connected disability generally is a well-grounded claim.) VA has a duty to assist the veteran in the development of facts pertinent to a well-grounded claim. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. § 3.103(a) (1994). The Board is interested in ascertaining the current status of the service-connected disabilities because it has been several years since the most recent compensation examinations by the VA. Also, additional record development is deemed necessary because there are numerous reports from VA treating physicians of record and the most recent statement from the veteran reflects that he continues to receive VA treatment. The purpose of this development is to ensure that a complete record is available for review on the merits of all claims. In view of the foregoing, the Board concludes that further action, as specified below, would be helpful prior to decisions on the merits of the claims. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED to the RO for the following actions: 1. The RO should contact the veteran and request that he clarify all issues on appeal. He should also be requested to identify the names, addresses, and approximate dates of treatment for all VA and non-VA health care providers who have treated him at any time since service discharge for disabilities for which he is claiming service connection, or have treated him in recent years for any service-connected disability. With any necessary authorization from the veteran, the RO should attempt to obtain copies of pertinent treatment records identified by the veteran, which have not been previously secured, and associate them with the claims folder. In any event, the RO should obtain copies of all VA treatment records which have not previously been secured. 2. Thereafter, the veteran should be afforded VA examinations by board certified specialists, if available, to determine the current severity of his service-connected disorders, and the nature, extent and etiology of any disabilities for which service connection is claimed. The examinations should be conducted in accordance with the VA Physician's Guide for Disability Evaluation Examinations. All indicated studies should be completed. All manifestations of the service-connected disabilities should be described in detail. The examinations must include a current examination for housebound status or permanent need for regular aid and attendance. It is imperative that a copy of this Remand and the claims folder be provided to the examiners for review prior to examination. 3. Thereafter, the RO should undertake any other indicated development, readjudicate the issues currently certified on appeal and adjudicate any additional claims being pursued by the veteran. If the benefits sought on appeal are not granted to the appellant's satisfaction, a Supplemental Statement of the Case addressing all issues in appellate status should be prepared and furnished to the appellant and his representative. They should be provided an opportunity to respond. Thereafter, in accordance with proper appellate procedures, the case should be returned to the Board for further appellate review, if otherwise in order. In taking this action, the Board implies no conclusion, either legal or factual, as to any final outcome warranted. The appellant need take no action until otherwise notified. F. JUDGE FLOWERS 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).