BVA9504895 
DOCKET NO.  93-09 745     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Lincoln,
Nebraska

THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to service connection for residuals of a left
ankle fracture.

2.  Entitlement to service connection for bronchitis.

3.  Entitlement to service connection for residuals of a cervical
spine injury.

4.  Entitlement to service connection for residuals of a head
trauma.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: The American Legion

WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL

Appellant

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

M. J. Bohanan, Associate Counsel

REMAND

The appellant served on active duty from February 1955 to March
1957.

This appeal arises from a December 1991, Department of Veterans
Affairs, Lincoln, Nebraska (VARO) rating decision which denied
the appellant service connection for the residuals of a left
ankle fracture, bronchitis, the residuals of a cervical spine
injury, and the residuals of head trauma.

During his December 1992 hearing on appeal, the appellant
testified that he was "beaten up" while out with friends during
service, and treated at Stockton Memorial Hospital for head and
neck injuries.  However, the Board notes that these records are
not associated with the appellant's claims folder.

The appellant also testified that he received regular
examinations while employed with the Burlington Northern
Railroad.  However, these records are also not associated with
the appellant's claims folder.

Finally, the appellant testified that he was injured while
employed with Burlington Northern Railroad and received treatment
from an orthopedist who informed him of "some roots on [his]
cervical, that had been there for quite some time."  However,
these records are not associated with the appellant's claims
folder.

The appellant's most recent VA examination was conducted in
November 1991.

The Board believes that further development of the evidence, to
include an orthopedic and neurological examination, is necessary
in this case.  Hyder v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 22 (1991).  The
case is therefore REMANDED to VARO for the following actions:

1.  VARO should contact the appellant and
ascertain the names and addresses of any
health care providers, particularly those
providers referred to during the
appellant's hearing on appeal.  VARO should
then attempt to obtain records from said
providers.  Proper authorization for the
release of such information should be
obtained from the appellant.  If any of the
attempts to secure either an authorization
for release or records are unsuccessful,
any efforts expended should be documented.
All records obtained should be associated
with the appellant's claims folder.

2.  VARO should attempt to obtain all
physical examination reports made while the
appellant was employed with Northern
Burlington Railroad.  Proper authorization
for the release of such information should
be obtained from the appellant.  If any of
the attempts to secure either an
authorization for release or records are
unsuccessful, any efforts expended should
be documented.  All records obtained should
be associated with the appellant's claims
folder.

3.  The appellant should be scheduled for
an orthopedic and neurological examinations
for purposes of determining the nature,
extent and etiology of any head trauma,
cervical spine injury or ankle fracture
residuals.  The examiners should also be
requested, insofar as medically possible,
to express an opinion regarding the
etiology of any musculoskeletal or
neurological disorders found.  All
appropriate studies should be performed.
The appellant's claims folder must be
furnished to the examiner prior to the
examination.  The report of the examination
should be associated with the appellant's
claims folder.

Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board, if in
order.  The Board intimates no opinion as to the ultimate outcome
of this case.  The appellant need take no action unless otherwise
notified.

          C. P. RUSSELL
          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) (1994).