92 Decision Citation: BVA 92-10918 Y92 BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C. 20420 DOCKET NO. 91-36 041 ) DATE ) ) ) THE ISSUE Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disability. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Milo H. Hawley, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran had active service from August 1950 to July 1954 and from October 1967 to April 1972. This matter came before the Board on appeal from a rating decision of March 1991 from the Reno, Nevada, Regional Office (hereinafter RO). The notice of disagreement was received in April 1991. The statement of the case was issued in May 1991. The substantive appeal was received in June 1991. The appeal was docketed at the Board in July 1991. The appellant is represented in his appeal by Disabled American Veterans, to which the file was referred. That organization submitted additional written argument to the Board in September 1991. REMAND The veteran has established entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic seizure disorder with chronic alcoholism and chronic brain syndrome, evaluated as 60 percent disabling, effective from April 1972. By decision in June 1984, the Board of Veterans' Appeals denied the veteran entitlement to service connection for residuals of exposure to Agent Orange manifested by a skin disorder and sexual dysfunction. In October 1989, the veteran filed a claim for entitlement to a total rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disability. He also requested that his claim for entitlement to service connection for residuals of Agent Orange manifested by a skin disorder and sexual dysfunction be reopened. The Board notes that the RO has not yet developed the veteran's claim for residuals of exposure to Agent Orange. In Harris v. Derwinski, U.S. Vet. App. No. 90-240 (March 20, 1991), the United States Court of Veterans Appeals stated that, when two issues are "inextricably intertwined," a decision on one issue would have a significant impact on the veteran's claim for the second issue, thereby reopening the first issue. In order for the Board to reach a final decision, both issues, when inextricably linked together, must be considered. Therefore, the Board believes that, in light of the Harris decision, the issue of whether new and material evidence has been submitted sufficient to reopen the veteran's claim for entitlement to service connection for residuals of Agent Orange should be resolved prior to a final appellate decision of the issue of entitlement to a total rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disability. Further, it appears from the evidence that a current examination with respect to the veteran's service-connected disability has not been accomplished. Since the veteran's claim is well grounded, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has a duty to assist in the development of facts pertinent to his claim. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.103. In light of the above, the appeal is REMANDED to the RO for the following: 1. The originating agency should first consider whether new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen a claim of entitlement to service connection for residuals of exposure to Agent Orange manifested by a skin condition and sexual dysfunction in light of the two-step analysis set forth in Manio. 2. Copies of all recent in- and outpatient records of treatment received by the veteran at VA medical facilities and his Vocational-Rehabilitation folder, if any, should be made a part of the record. 3. The veteran should be afforded a special VA psychiatric examination, to include a social and industrial survey, to determine the extent and severity of the service-connected psychiatric disorder. All necessary tests and studies should be accomplished, and all clinical manifestations should be reported in detail. The claims folder should be made available to the physician prior to the examination for review. 4. Following completion of the above action, the RO should determine whether the veteran is entitled to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disability. 5. If any determination is adverse to the veteran, a supplemental statement of the case, which sets forth all the evidence of record, the pertinent laws and regulations, and the reasons and bases for all decisions reached, should be furnished to the veteran and his representative. After affording the veteran and his representative an appropriate opportunity to respond to the supplemental statement of the case, the veteran's claims folder should be returned to the Board for further study. No action by the veteran is required unless he receives further notice. The purposes of this REMAND are to provide due process and procure clarifying data. The Board intimates no opinion, either legal or factual, as to the ultimate disposition of the appeal. BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C. 20420 * JAMES R. ANTHONY (MEMBER TEMPORARILY ABSENT) WAYNE M. BRAEUER (CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE) *38 U.S.C. § 7102(a)(2)(A) (1992) permits a Board of Veterans' Appeals Section, upon direction of the Chairman of the Board, to proceed with the transaction of business without awaiting assignment of an additional Member to the Section when the Section is composed of fewer than three Members due to absence of a Member, vacancy on the Board or inability of the Member assigned to the Section to serve on the panel. The Chairman has directed that the Section proceed with the transaction of business, including the issuance of decisions, without awaiting the assignment of a third Member. Under 38 U.S.C. § 7252 (1992), 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.