BVA9506503 
DOCKET NO.  93-16 349     )       DATE
          )
          )

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

THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to an increased evaluation for polycystic kidney
disease with hypertension, currently rated as 10 percent
disabling.

2.  Entitlement to an increased (compensable) evaluation for
defective hearing in the left ear with tinnitus.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: The American Legion

WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL

Appellant

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

J. W. Loeb, Counsel

INTRODUCTION

The veteran served on active duty from March 1972 to March 1992.
This case came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on
appeal from a November 1992 rating decision of the Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Montgomery,
Alabama.

The veteran noted in his April 1993 substantive appeal that he
could not secure employment due to his service-connected
disabilities.  This matter is referred to the RO for appropriate
action.

REMAND

Although the veteran testified at his personal hearing at the RO
in May 1993 that he had undergone a semiannual renal check-up for
his service-connected kidney disease since 1988, there are no
postservice outpatient records on file.  The veteran also
testified at his 1993 personal hearing that his service-connected
kidney disease had increased in severity because of peripheral
edema since VA examination in July 1992 and warranted an
increased evaluation.

Based on the above, the Board finds that additional development
is required prior to final disposition of this case.  Therefore,
this case is being REMANDED to the RO for the following actions:

1.  The veteran should be requested to
provide the names, addresses, and dates of
treatment of any physicians or facilities,
including the VA, that have treated him for
his polycystic kidney disease with
hypertension or his defective hearing in
the left ear with tinnitus since service
discharge in March 1992.  Any medical
provider identified should be asked for
copies of the veteran's clinical records
not currently on file.  Any records
obtained should be associated with the
claims folder.  The veteran should be asked
to sign any necessary consent forms for
release of his private medical records.

2.  The RO should obtain and associate with
the claims file the reports of the
veteran's periodic kidney examinations
since discharge, which the veteran
indicated at his hearing were conducted at
Ft. Rucker.

3.  After the above actions have been
completed, if an adequate renal examination
for rating purposes dated within the
previous year is not on file, the veteran
should be given a special renal examination
by a board certified internist, if
available, in accordance with the VA
Physician's Guide for Disability Evaluation
Examinations, to determine the severity of
his service-connected polycystic kidney
disease with hypertension.  A medical
history with notation of any time lost from
employment due to the disease should be
included with the examination report.  All
necessary tests and studies should be
conducted, and all findings should be
reported in detail.  The claims folder must
be made available to the examiner for
review in connection with the examination.

4.  The RO should then undertake any other
indicated development.  Thereafter, the RO
should readjudicate the issues on appeal to
include consideration of 38 C.F.R.
§ 3.321(b)(1).

When the above actions have been completed, unless the benefits
sought are granted to the satisfaction of the veteran, the
veteran and his representative should be provided with a
supplemental statement of the case that addresses all issues in
appellate status and given the applicable time period to respond.
The case should then be returned to the Board, if otherwise in
order.  The veteran need take no action until notified.

          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).