BVA9502240 
DOCKET NO.  93-10 325     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St. Louis,
Missouri

THE ISSUE

Whether the veteran meets the minimum active duty service
requirements for entitlement to a permanent and total disability
evaluation for pension purposes.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: Missouri Veterans Commission

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Lori R. Bucci, Associate Counsel

REMAND

The veteran served on active duty from December 1990 to August
1992.

This appeal arises from a rating decision in January 1993 by the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in St.
Louis, Missouri.

In October 1992, the veteran was injured when a tree fell and
broke his neck.  A November 1992 VA examination to determine
whether the veteran requires aid and attendance, and/or whether
he is housebound resulted in diagnoses which included
quadriplegia.

The RO has determined that the veteran does not meet the minimum
active duty service requirements imposed by 38 C.F.R. § 3.12a
(1994),  because he was separated after serving only nineteen
months worth of active duty.  The veteran contends, however, that
he is entitled to non-service connected pension because he was
released under early out and/or hardship discharge procedures
pursuant to 10 U.S.C. §§ 1171, 1172 in order to help his ailing
parents on their farm.  The veteran’s DD Form 214 reveals that he
was released from active duty for "Voluntary Miscellaneous
Reasons."  Whether these reasons included hardship, or an early
out discharge for the convenience of the government is unclear.
Hence, further development is warranted.

Accordingly, in order to comply with VA's duty to assist the
veteran, this case is REMANDED to the RO for the following
development:

The RO should contact the National
Personnel Records Center in St. Louis,
Missouri, and attempt to obtain the
veteran's Air Force personnel records to
determine the precise basis or bases for
his separation from active duty after
serving only nineteen months of a four year
enlistment contract.

The RO should then review the evidence and determine whether the
veteran's claim for entitlement to non-service connected pension
may now be granted.  If the decision remains adverse to the
veteran, he and his representative should be provided with an
appropriate Supplemental Statement of the Case and an opportunity
to respond thereto.  The case should then be returned to the
Board of Veterans' Appeals for further appellate consideration.

The purposes of the REMAND are to assist the veteran in the
development of his claim.  By this REMAND the Board intimates no
opinion, legal or factual, as to the ultimate disposition of the
appeal.  No action is required of the appellant until he receives
further notice.

          DEREK R. BROWN
          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).

 The Board observes that 38 C.F.R. § 3.12a was introduced to implement the provi
section 1002, initially codified at 10 U.S.C. §  977, and now codified at 38 U.S
Interestingly, in issuing the regulation in 1981, the VA Compensation and Pensio
"no one is eligible for disability pension ... based on service after September
effect on disability ... pension entitlement."  See VA Compensation and Transmit
A preliminary review of the current statute, however, does not appear to support
entitlement from its provisions.  The Board at this time, however, reaches no co
as to whether 38 U.S.C.A. § 5303A imposes a minimum active duty requirement on i
veteran who did serve during a period of war since the enactment of the implemen
 The Board takes this opportunity to alert the veteran that his remedy ultimatel
States Air Force’s Board of Correction of Military Records, and his presentation
of the "Narrative Reason for Separation" noted on his DD Form 214.