BVA9502073 DOCKET NO. 93-06 436 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St. Petersburg, Florida THE ISSUES Entitlement to service connection for epilepsy and for residuals of a stress fracture of the right tibia. Whether new and material evidence to reopen a claim for service connection for allergic rhinitis has been submitted. ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Neil Reiter, Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from September 1969 to August 1973. It has been exceptionally difficult for the Board to ascertain exactly what the veteran is claiming service connection for, due to the rambling and unintelligible nature of most of his correspondence. As such, we will review for the benefit of the veteran, any representative he may choose to represent him, and the RO, some of the pertinent adjudicative history. In March 1986 he filed a claim for service connection for allergies, deemed to be allergic rhinitis, feet and arches, deemed to be bilateral pes planus, a blood disorder, and stress fractures deemed to be residuals of a stress fracture of the right tibia. The RO in effect dismissed the claim in June 1986 for failure to report for a VA examination. In October 1987 he filed a further claim for service connection for brain damage and scarring of the legs from ulcers. He also again claimed service connection for pes planus. In a January 1988 rating action the RO granted service connection for scars of the legs resulting from leg ulcers associated with a hemolytic streptococcus infection. Service connection was denied for pes planus and paranoid schizophrenia claimed as brain damage. We find no record of the veteran having been notified of this determination. As such, finality did not attach to the denial of service connection for pes planus or paranoid schizophrenia at this time. In January 1988 the veteran filed a claim for service connection for allergies. In April 1988 the RO denied service connection for allergic rhinitis and the veteran was notified of same by letter dated April 28, 1988. There was no timely notice of disagreement. As such, finality attaches to the denial of service connection for allergic rhinitis in April 1988. REMAND In November 1992 the RO denied service connection for a number of disorders. There was a timely notice of disagreement as to those disorders reflected on the title page of this decision. In his notice of disagreement and his appeal, the veteran maintained that he has psychiatric or neurological pathology which had its onset in service. He specifically mentions brain damage and frontal lobe atrophy due to alcoholism, and schizophrenia as having been incurred in service. The regional office initially interpreted the veteran's claim as a claim for service connection for epilepsy or neurological disease, but the veteran seems to have refined or redefined his claim to include service connection for alcoholism and schizophrenia. In the same way, he has implied that the arthritis which is currently manifested is related to flat feet which was treated and manifested in service. The Board believes that service connection for these disabilities; that is, service connection for alcoholism, schizophrenia, arthritis of the lower extremities, and a bilateral flatfoot condition, are inextricably intertwined with the issues certified for appeal by the regional office. A statement of the case relating to these additional issues has not been issued. There was a rating action in February 1993 which determined that new and material evidence had not been submitted to reopen a claim for service connection for schizophrenia. It was incorrect to address this issue on the basis of new and material evidence because finality did not attach to the January 1988 rating action. The Board notes that the veteran appointed the Georgia State Department of Veterans Service as his representative in August 1975. He is currently a resident of the State of Florida, and he has not indicated whether he desired to change his representative from the state representative in the State of Georgia. The veteran's representation should be clarified prior to final appellate review. Accordingly, the issue of whether new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen a claim of service connection for allergic rhinitis is being deferred, and the case is hereby REMANDED to the regional office for the following actions: 1. The regional office should contact the veteran to clarify his representation, noting that he had previously designated the Georgia State Department of Veterans Service as his representative in August 1975. In this regard he should be furnished complete information concerning the fact that the Florida State Department of Veterans Affairs and the national veterans service organizations will represent him free of charge. It the veteran designates a person or an organization to represent him, such representative should be encouraged to review the file prior to any further adjudicative action, so that he (she) may assist the veteran in articulating specifically the disorders for which he seeks service connection and detailing any evidence which is believed to be relevant to each claim. 2. The regional office should review and adjudicate the veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral flatfoot, arthritis of the lower extremities, schizophrenia, and alcoholism. The RO should also carefully review any matters raised by any representative which the veteran may designate, to ascertain the relevance of those matters to the current appeal. If this review results in a denial of any of these claims, the veteran and any representative he may designate should be fully informed of the denial and the basis thereof. If a notice of disagreement is thereafter received the regional office should issue a supplemental statement of the case covering these issues to the veteran and any representative. The case should thereafter be processed in accordance with appropriate appellate procedures. No action is required of the veteran until he receives further notice. The purpose of this REMAND is to provide due process to the veteran. The Board intimates no opinion, either legal or factual, as to the ultimate decision warranted in this case. BRUCE E. HYMAN 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).