BVA9503860 
DOCKET NO.  93-14 362     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Montgomery,
Alabama

THE ISSUE

Entitlement to restoration of a 20 percent rating for low back
disability.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: Alabama Department of Veterans
Affairs

WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL

The appellant

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Jeffrey A. Pisaro, Counsel

REMAND

The veteran had active service from November 1973 to November
1984.  This appeal arises from a March 1992 rating decision of
the Montgomery, Alabama, Regional Office (RO), which reduced the
evaluation for low back disability from 20 to 10 percent.

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has a duty to assist the
veteran in the development of facts pertaining to his claim.  38
U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. § 3.103(a) (1994).  The
Court has held that the duty to assist includes obtaining
available records which are relevant to the claimant's appeal.
The duty to assist is neither optional nor discretionary.  Littke
v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 90 (1990).  The record shows that the
veteran has been receiving continuous physical therapy and
outpatient treatment at the Tuskegee VA Medical Center; complete
medical treatment records should be obtained from that facility.

The duty to assist also includes, when appropriate, the duty to
conduct a thorough and contemporaneous examination of the veteran
that takes into account the records of prior medical treatment.
Green v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 121 (1991).  This is to ensure
that the evaluation of a disability is a fully informed one.  The
veteran contends that he suffers from radiating pain into the
lower left extremity, and an October 1991 x-ray report
recommended that a CT scan of the lower lumbar spine be conducted
to rule out the possibility of disc herniation.  In view of the
foregoing, following the gathering of all recent medical records,
the veteran should be afforded VA orthopedic and neurology
examinations.

Under the circumstances of this case, the Board finds that
further assistance is required.  Accordingly, the case is
REMANDED to the RO for the following actions:

1.  The RO should contact the veteran and
obtain the names and addresses of all
health care providers where he has received
treatment for his back in recent years.
Thereafter, the RO should obtain legible
copies of all records which have not
already been obtained to include outpatient
and physical therapy records from the
Tuskegee VA Medical Center from August 1991
to the present.  Once obtained, all records
must be associated with the claims folder.

2.  Following completion of above
development, the veteran should be afforded
VA orthopedic and neurology examinations to
determine the nature and extent of all
disability of the back.  All indicated
tests, to include a CT scan, should be
accomplished.  It is imperative that the
physicians review the entire claims folder
prior to the examinations.  All disability
should be evaluated in relation to its
history, with emphasis upon the limitation
of activity, to include time lost from
employment, imposed by the disabling
condition in light of the whole recorded
history.

3.  When the above developments have been
completed, the case should be reviewed by
the RO.  If the decision remains adverse to
the veteran in any way, he and his
representative should be furnished with a
supplemental statement of the case.  They
should then be afforded the applicable time
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 take no action
until he is further informed.  The purpose of this REMAND is to
obtain additional information and to ensure due process of law.
No inference should be drawn regarding the final disposition of
the claim as a result of this action.

          CHARLES E. HOGEBOOM
          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) (1994).