BVA9500048 
DOCKET NO.  89-27 210     )       DATE
          )
          RECONSIDERATION )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Jackson,
Mississippi

THE ISSUE

Entitlement to service connection for chronic synovitis of
multiple joints.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: Hansel Anthony Jones, Attorney

WITNESS AT HEARINGS ON APPEAL

The appellant

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Raymond F. Ferner, Counsel

INTRODUCTION

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA or
Board) on appeal from decisions of the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) Regional Office in Jackson, Mississippi, (RO) which
denied the benefit sought on appeal.  The veteran, who had active
service from October 1965 to August 1969, appealed the RO's
denial to the BVA, and the case was initially received at the
Board in September 1989.  A BVA decision dated in September 1990
affirmed the RO's denial of the benefit sought on appeal.  The
appellant appealed the Board's decision to the United States
Court of Veterans Appeals (Court), and in an Order, 
[citation redacted], the Court vacated the Board's September 1990 
decision and remanded the case to the Board for further action.

Thereafter, the Board referred the case to an independent medical
expert for an opinion, and after receipt of the opinion, a
February 1994 BVA decision remanded the case to the RO for
further development.  The case was returned to the Board in April
1994.  A July 1994 BVA decision affirmed the RO's denial of the
benefit sought on appeal.  The veteran subsequently requested
reconsideration of the Board's July 1994 decision, and
reconsideration of the Board's decision was ordered in November
1994.

REMAND

One of the purposes of the Board's February 1994 remand decision
was to obtain biopsy slides prepared during service and following
service at a VA medical center.  The independent medical examiner
indicated in the August 1993 opinion that "the claim really
hinges on these specimens."  However, attempts by the RO to
obtain those biopsy slide specimens were unsuccessful, and the
Board entered a decision in July 1994 without benefit of that
evidence.

The veteran subsequently obtained those biopsy slides and the
actual slides prepared at the VA medical center are associated
with the claims file.  Although the service biopsy slide was
reviewed by a VA physician and an interpretation and photograph
of that slide are of record, the Board believes that the actual
slide should be associated with the claims file so that all of
the actual specimens may be reviewed together.

Therefore, in order to give the veteran every consideration with
respect to the present appeal, it is the Board's opinion that
further development of the case is necessary.  Accordingly, this
case is REMANDED for the following action:

The RO should contact the veteran and
request that he submit the biopsy slide,
Accession No. S69-9050, prepared during
service in 1969 for inclusion in his claims
file.  If possible, the actual transfer of
the material should be coordinated through
the Jackson VA Medical Center.  When this
development is completed, the case should
be returned to the Board for further
appellate action.

The purpose of this REMAND is to obtain additional development,
and the Board does not intimate any opinion as to the merits of
the case, either favorable or unfavorable, at this time.  The
veteran is free, of course, to submit any additional evidence he
desires to have considered in connection with the current appeal.
No action is required of the veteran until he is notified.

          JACQUELINE E. MONROE    WARREN W. RICE, JR.

          CHARLES E. HOGEBOOM

          JAMES R. ANTHONY        ROBERT D. PHILIPP

          WAYNE M. BRAEUER
Members, Board of Veterans' Appeals

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).