BVA9503544 
DOCKET NO.  93-05 073     )       DATE
          )
          )

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

THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to service connection for disabilities of the
thoracic and lumbar spines.

2.  Entitlement to an increased evaluation for residuals,
cervical sprain with anterior subluxation, C3 on C4 with
associated headaches, currently evaluated as 10 percent
disabling.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: The American Legion

WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL

The veteran
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Wayne A. Tonkins, Associate Counsel

INTRODUCTION

The veteran had active service from November 1985 to November
1989.

This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals
(hereinafter "the Board") on appeal from a March 1992 rating
decision of the St. Petersburg, Florida, Regional Office
(hereinafter RO) and its May 1992 rating decision confirming the
prior decision after consideration of additional service medical
records received after the March 1992 rating decision.  A notice
of disagreement was received in May 1992.  A statement of the
case was issued in June 1992 and a substantive appeal was issued
in July 1992.  The RO confirmed and continued its prior rating
decision in its July 1992 rating decision and a supplemental
statement of the case was issued within the same month.  A
supplemental statement of the case was also issued in November
1992.

REMAND

The veteran asserts on appeal that the RO erred in denying
service connection for thoracic back pain, muscle strain in the
L3-L4 area, and for spina bifida occulta, S1 with back pain, as
those disabilities were incurred or aggravated during active
military service.  He contends that the RO's decision in March
1992 was not accurate because it did not consider all of his
service medical records and that the subsequent decisions were
attempts to validate the March 1992 decision.  He further
contends that he did not have any back problems prior to service.
It is contended that as a result of military service, the
vertebrae in the middle of his back are out of alignment and that
arthritis is throughout his spine.  The spina bifida occulta
became permanent during service and if it was not caused by
active military service, it was certainly aggravated by trauma to
his back that occurred in service.  It is also contended that the
disabilities are the result of the veteran's fall while doing
heavy lifting that was diagnosed in service as low back sprain.

The veteran asserts that the cervical sprain with anterior
subluxation, C3 on C4, with associated headaches are more
disabling than the current evaluation reflects.  He further
asserts that he suffers from limitation of motion of the cervical
spine, as well as severe and often blinding headaches that are
secondary to his neck problem.

In reviewing the record, the Board notes that the RO has included
"associated headaches" with the veteran's service connected
cervical spine disability, and made one rating to encompass the
symptoms relating to the headaches and organic cervical
symptomatology.  However, the Board discerns no clinical
diagnoses relating to headaches, and thus is unable to determine
whether a separate rating is indeed warranted for headaches as
alleged by the veteran.  The Board also notes that the latest
rating examination with respect to the cervical spine is more
than three years old, and an updated examination would be
beneficial.  Thus, final appellate action will be deferred
pending further development.

Accordingly, the case is being REMANDED for the following action:

The veteran should be accorded examinations
by a neurologist and orthopedist to determine
the extent and severity of his cervical spine
disability with headaches.  The neurologist
should, if possible, classify the type of
headaches involved.  The claims folder should
be made available to the examining physicians
who should conduct their examinations
consistent with the appropriate physician's
guide.

When the above development has been completed, the case should
again be reviewed by the originating agency.  If the decision
remains adverse to the veteran, he and his representative should
be furnished a Supplemental Statement of the Case and afforded a
reasonable period to respond.  Thereafter, subject to current
appellate procedures, the case should be returned to the Board
for further appellate consideration, if appropriate.

The veteran need not take any action unless he is further
informed.  The purpose of this REMAND is to allow for further
development of the record.  No inference should be drawn from it
regarding the final disposition of the veteran's claim.

          E. W. SEERY
          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 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).