BVA9401488 DOCKET NO. 92-11 609 ) DATE ) ) ) THE ISSUES 1. Service connection for residuals of burn scars of the legs, arms, hands and face. 2. Service connection for cardiovascular disorder, including heart murmur and high blood pressure. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD William L. Pine, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The appellant served on active duty from August 1945 to December 1948. The Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) denied a claim for service connection for a cardiovascular disorder in December 1983. In January 1990 the appellant submitted a statement to the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office (VARO) in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, requesting to reopen his claim for service connection. He did not specify the disability concerned. VARO construed the statement as a request to reopen the previously denied claim for service connection for a cardiovascular disorder. This matter came before the Board on appeal from an April 1990 rating decision by VARO denying a request to reopen the claim for service connection for a heart disorder, for failure to provide new and material evidence. By telephone call in June 1990 (Report of Contact of record), the appellant specified his claims as service connection for burns of legs, arms, hands and face; for high blood pressure; and for heart murmur. VARO afforded the appellant a hearing in July 1990. VARO notified the appellant of the rating decision denying the claim for cardiovascular disability and of his appellate rights by letter, and received a notice of disagreement in November 1990. In January 1991, VARO issued a statement of the case addressing the cardiovascular disorder. In January 1991 VARO issued a rating decision denying the claim for service connection for burns. In February 1991, VARO notified the appellant of the decision and received his notice of disagreement as to that denial. VARO issued a statement of the case in March 1991. VARO received the substantive appeal as to the burns in April 1991 with respect to the January 1991 rating decision. In a hearing conducted at VARO in August 1991, the appellant indicated that the claim for service connection for a cardiovascular disorder was on appeal to the Board. The Board received the appeal in July 1992. The appellant's representative in this matter, Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, provided representation at a hearing before a member of the Board in Washington, D.C., in April 1993. REMAND The appellant has testified repeatedly that he was diagnosed with a heart murmur at the "Marine Hospital" at 40th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, within the year following his separation from service. Apparently, that facility no longer exists. The appellant reports he was in the Merchant Marines prior to his naval service and was referred to the "Marine Hospital" by VARO Pittsburgh in 1948. There is reason to believe the hospital in question may have been operated by the Merchant Marine. If so, records may be in the custody of the United States Public Health Service. A thorough attempt should be made to obtain any records that may yet be in the custody of a United States agency. See M21-1, III, 4.18 (Nov. 8, 1991); DVA Circ. 21-88-7, Rev. (Feb. 16, 1990); see also M21-1, III, 9.17 (Dec. 2, 1992). The appellant testified at a hearing in July 1990 that he was stationed in Landcast, New Jersey, after the explosion in which he was burned, and was treated repeatedly for burns at sick bay, the name of which facility was unintelligible to the hearing transcriptionist. Transcript at 10 (July 30, 1990). In his statement of January 22, 1990, the appellant reported he was treated for headaches and dizziness after the explosion. VARO should request the appellant to provide a full description of the vessel and its specific location at the time of the purported explosion and the dates and location of treatment and attempt to obtain any existing logs, morning reports, day books or sick bay reports through the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) Records Reconstruction Branch, National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) or from any other United States agencies as may now be the repository for such records. See M21-1, Part III, 4.04 (Nov. 8, 1991). Inquiry to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) for other sources of clinical or ship's records should be undertaken. The statement of January 22, 1990, can be construed as reasonably raising a claim for service connection for headaches and dizziness. See Myers v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 127 (1991). The statement in April 1993 by the appellant's representative about emotional scars from the explosion, Transcript at 15 (Apr. 1, 1993), and the statement of April 14, 1993, by the appellant's spouse about "anxiety, depression, nightmares, stress . . . ," likewise can be construed as reasonably raising a claim for service connection for a psychiatric disorder. Id. These reasonably raised claims were contained in documents of record prior to the Board's receipt of the certified issues. See EF v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 324 (1991). Whereas the claims arise from the same incident from which the claims now at issue arise, we feel it is in the interest of avoiding piecemeal adjudication, Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 180, 181 (1991), for those claims to be developed and adjudicated prior to appellate review in the instant case. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Fully document all actions taken to assist the appellant with his claim pursuant to this remand order. 2. Attempt to obtain any health records in the custody of the United States Public Health Service or other potential custodian of records from the "Marine Hospital" at 40th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, from 1948 to 1949. Request any available records from all sources indicated in VA Manual M21-1, Part III, 4.18 (Nov. 8, 1991) and 9.17 (Dec. 2, 1992), and any other source recommended by agencies contacted in conjunction with this inquiry. Add any records obtained to the claims folder. 3. Request the appellant to provide a full description of the vessel and its specific location at the time of the purported explosion, together with full identification of the facility at which he was treated and the dates of treatment subsequent to the accident of April 1946. Request NPRC, with the assistance of the Records Reconstruction Branch, and the NARA to provide any available logs, morning reports, day books, sick bay reports or other records pertaining to the explosion in which the appellant has claimed he was injured, and after which he received medical treatment. Implement such methods of inquiry which are indicated in VA Manual M21-1, Part III, 4.04 (Nov. 8, 1991), and inquire of any other sources recommended by agencies contacted in conjunction with this inquiry. Add any records obtained to the claims folder. 4. Request the appellant to state whether he is claiming service connection for headaches, dizziness, or any psychiatric disorder. Fully develop such claims, including the ordering of any indicated medical examinations, for any additional claim that the appellant states he is raising. Thereafter, personnel of the originating agency shall readjudicate the claim and determine whether the appellant's claim may now be allowed. If not, provide the appellant with a comprehensive supplemental statement of the case, indicating that he has a reasonable time to respond, and return the case to the Board for further appellate consideration, if appropriate. This REMAND is to develop evidence and to afford the appellant due process of law. Appellate review of all certified issues is deferred pending completion of the dictates of this order. The Board intimates no opinion as to the final outcome warranted in this case. BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS WASHINGTON, D.C. 20420 BETTINA S. CALLAWAY MATTHEW J. GORMLEY, III KENNETH R. ANDREWS, JR. 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).