BVA9500440 
DOCKET NO.  93-09 458     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St. Petersburg,
Florida

THE ISSUE

Entitlement to an increased evaluation for chronic low back pain
with radiculopathy secondary to degenerative disc disease,
currently evaluated as 10 percent disabling.

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

J.R. King,  Associate Counsel

REMAND

The appellant served on active duty from January 1972 to January
1992.

This matter is before the Board of Veterans Appeals (Board) on
appeal from a September 1992 rating determination of the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) located
in St. Petersburg, Florida.

The veteran was accorded a VA general medical examination for
disability evaluation purposes in June 1992.  This examination
resulted in the following diagnosis:  chronic low back pain with
right radiculopathy, secondary to disc disease and degenerative
bony changes.

The RO has assigned a 10 percent evaluation for the back disorder
in accordance with the criteria set forth in the VA's Schedule
for Rating Disabilities, 38 C.F.R. Part 4, Diagnostic Code 5293.
Diagnostic Code 5293 provides for the evaluation of
intervertebral disc syndrome and contemplates symptoms compatible
with sciatic neuropathy with characteristic pain and demonstrable
muscle spasm, absent ankle jerk, or other neurological findings
appropriate to site of diseased disc.  Where the disorder is
moderate, with recurring attacks, a 20 percent evaluation is
provided.

In his March 1993 substantive appeal, the veteran claims that his
sciatic neuropathy is moderate to severe and that he is entitled
to a 20 percent evaluation.  Stating that the symptoms he
experiences have been consistent throughout the course of the
disability, he alleges that these symptoms severely limit his
activities.  The veteran also stated that he has often obtained
treatment from a doctor of osteopathy to adjust his back to
relieve the pain.

There are no records in the claims folder pertaining to any
consultation with an osteopath and no attempt has been made to
obtain records of the treatment referred to by the veteran in his
substantive appeal.  Records of this treatment may very likely
contain data pertinent the appellant's current claim and must be
added to the record.  The United States Court of Veterans Appeals
(Court) has held that the duty to assist may arise when the
veteran simply refers to private medical examinations even when
there is no specific request that the VA obtain these records.
Caffrey v. Brown, 6 Vet.App. 377 (1994).  Moreover, the fact that
the appellant has asserted that his painful episodes of sciatic
neuropathy are so severe as to require that he seek medical
treatment is sufficient to trigger the VA duty to assist him in
the development of facts pertinent to his claim.  The Court held
in Caffrey that the veterans claim that his condition has become
more severe is well-grounded where the condition was previously
service-connected and rated and the veteran subsequently asserts
that a higher rating is justified.  The Board is of the opinion
that the appellant should be afforded a neurologic examination to
determine the severity of disc disease and radiculopathy.

Given the jurisprudence of the Court, and the evidentiary
development which is necessary in this claim, it is REMANDED for
the following actions:

1.  The RO should request the veteran to
identify the names, addresses, and
approximate dates of treatment for all
other health care providers who may possess
additional records pertinent to his claims,
including the doctor of osteopathy to whom
he referred in his substantive appeal.
With any necessary authorization from the
veteran, the RO should attempt to obtain
copies of those treatment records
identified by the veteran.

2.  The RO should arrange for an
examination of the veteran by a
neurologist.  The claims folder must be
made available to the examiner in
conjunction with the examination of the
veteran.  Inasmuch as significant
disturbances of function in many neurologic
disorders can be episodic, the examiner
should set forth the history and frequency
of pertinent symptoms.  See Physician's
Guide for Disability Evaluation
Examination, Chapter 13.  The examiner
should summarize all significant positive
findings, particularly those relating to
limitation of function.  All indicated
studies should be performed, to include
goniometric measurement of the range of
motion of the affected areas of the spine.

Thereafter, the RO should readjudicate the veteran's claim.  If
the benefit sought on appeal is not granted to the veteran's
satisfaction, the RO should issue a supplemental statement of the
case.  The veteran should be provided an opportunity to respond.
The case should then be returned to the Board for further
appellate consideration, if otherwise in order.

In taking this action, the Board implies no conclusion, either
legal or factual, as to any ultimate outcome warranted.  No action
is required of the veteran until he is notified by the RO.

          GARY L. GICK
          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 deter-
mination.  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).