BVA9500383 
DOCKET NO.  93-10 313     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Roanoke,
Virginia

THE ISSUE

Whether new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen a
claim for service connection for a lung disorder.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: Virginia Department of Veterans
Affairs

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Joseph M. Horrigan, Counsel

INTRODUCTION

The veteran served on active duty from March 1943 to February
1946.

This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on
appeal from a July 1992 rating action from the Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Roanoke, Virginia.
The case is before the Board for appellate consideration at this
time.

REMAND

The record contains statements from a private physician who has
reported treating the veteran for respiratory complaints from
1946 to 1958.  The record also contains a statement from this
physician's son, an osteopathic physician, documenting recent
treatment for the veteran's respiratory complaints.  No clinical
records reflecting any of this treatment is in the claims folder.

In view of the foregoing, and given the duty to assist the
veteran in the development of his claim under 38 U.S.C.A. 5107(a)
(West 1991), this case is REMANDED to the RO for the following
action:

1.  The RO should contact J. P. Sutherland,
Jr., D.O., of Riverside Drive, P.O. Box
1030 in Grundy, Virginia, and ask him to
submit copies of all clinical records
reflecting his treatment for the veteran's
respiratory disorder.  Since this physician
is apparently the son of J. P. Sutherland,
M.D., also of Grundy, Virginia, he should
be requested to assist in obtaining
clinical records documenting the veterans
treatment during the period from 1946 to
1958.  All records obtained should be
associated with the claims folder.

When the above development has been completed, the RO should
review the veteran's claim.  If the benefit sought on appeal
remains denied, the veteran and his representative should be
provided with a supplemental statement of the case and afforded a
reasonable opportunity to respond.  Thereafter, the case should
be returned to the Board, if otherwise in order.

No action is required of the veteran unless he is informed by the
RO.  The purpose of this REMAND is to obtain additional clinical
evidence.  By this REMAND, the Board intimates no opinion as to
the outcome warranted in this case.

          H. N. SCHWARTZ
          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 action has been taken in
accordance with the Veterans' Benefits Improvements Act of 1994,
Pub. L. No. 103-446, § 303, 108 Stat. 4645, ___ (1994), and 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).