BVA9508403 
DOCKET NO.  93-18 133     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Boston,
Massachusetts

THE ISSUE

Entitlement to an increased (compensable) evaluation for
coccygodynia.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans

WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL

Appellant

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

C. M. Flatley, Counsel

REMAND

The veteran had active service from January 1969 to September
1970 and from January to June 1991.  This case comes before the
Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 1991
rating decision of the Boston, Massachusetts, Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO), which granted service
connection for coccygodynia and assigned a noncompensable
evaluation.

Review of the record indicates that the veteran has submitted a
well-grounded claim.  38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991).  The VA
therefore has a duty to assist the veteran in the development of
facts pertinent to his claim.  38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a); Murphy v.
Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 78, 81-82 (1990).  In this regard, the
Board initially notes that the veteran underwent a VA examination
in August 1991.  Since that time, he has provided details,
including at a personal hearing, as to increasing symptomatology
associated with his coccygodynia.  A private medical statement
reflects continued symptomatology; the veteran has testified that
on private evaluation, surgery was presented as a method of
treatment.  Transcript at 5,6.  In addition, at his personal
hearing, the veteran indicated that he was "seeing" a private
physician; it is unclear whether the veteran continues to receive
private treatment.  T. at 5.

Lastly, the Board notes that a January 1993 VA outpatient report
includes pertinent data and reflects that an x-ray study was to
be accomplished; follow-up evaluation the following March was
indicated.  Upon review of the record, the Board is of the
opinion that additional clinical data may prove helpful in the
evaluation of the veteran's claim.  In order to fully assist the
veteran in the development of his case, therefore, and extend to
the veteran every equitable consideration, additional development
is warranted.  As such, this case is REMANDED for the following:

1.  After any necessary information and
authorization are obtained from the
veteran, duplicates of any post-service
treatment, VA or private, inpatient or
outpatient, associated with the veteran's
coccygodynia, and not previously of record,
should be obtained by the RO and
incorporated into the claims folder.

2.  The RO should schedule a VA orthopedic
examination to determine the nature and
severity of the veteran's service-connected
coccygodynia.  The examination should be
conducted in accordance with the pertinent
provisions of the VA's Physician's Guide
for Disability Evaluation Examinations.
All indicated studies should be conducted.
The examination report should include a
full description of the veteran's symptoms,
clinical findings, and associated
functional impairment.  All findings should
be recorded in detail, including any range
of motion affected by the veteran's
coccygodynia, recorded in degrees.  A
comprehensive report, which represents
consideration of the aforementioned
factors, as well as the history of the
veteran's disability, should be provided.
The veteran's claims folder should be
provided to the examiner for review prior
to the examination.

3.  The RO should then review the veteran's
claim.  All pertinent law and regulations,
including schedular criteria, and United
States Court of Veterans Appeals (Court)
decisions should be considered.  If the
veteran's claim remains in a denied status,
he and his representative should be
provided with a supplemental statement of
the case, which includes a discussion of
any additional pertinent law and
regulations and a description of action
taken on the veteran's claim, consistent
with the Court's instruction in Gilbert v.
Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 49 (1990). The
applicable response time should be allowed.

The case should then be returned to the Board, if in order, after
compliance with customary appellate procedures.  No action is
required of the veteran until he is so informed.  The Board
intimates no opinion as to the ultimate decision warranted in
this case, pending completion of the requested development.

          THOMAS J. DANNAHER
          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. 133-446, § 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).