BVA9502989 
DOCKET NO.  93-12 483     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Atlanta,
Georgia

THE ISSUE

Entitlement to an increased evaluation for a gastrointestinal
disability, currently rated 40 percent disabling.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: Georgia Department of Veterans
Service

WITNESSES AT HEARING ON APPEAL

The appellant and a neighbor

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Mark J. Swiatek, Counsel

REMAND

The veteran had active service from May 1944 to February 1946.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board)
from a July 1992 decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA) Regional Office (RO) in Atlanta, Georgia.

A review of the record discloses that the July 1992 rating
decision was undertaken without benefit of a contemporaneous VA
medical examination.  The record includes statements from
D. T. Darnell, M.D., that report a number of gastrointestinal
symptoms.  The clinical records pertinent to the evaluation of
the veteran's disability, however, have not been obtained.  The
Board observes that, in an October 1992 statement, Dr. Darnell
reported that the veteran had recently experienced a significant
weight loss.  The VA medical records consist of outpatient
treatment reports through late 1992 and note occasional
gastrointestinal complaints.

The VA has a duty to assist the claimant in the development of
the claim that has been held to require obtaining a
contemporaneous medical examination and relevant treatment
reports to ensure that a decision rendered in a claim is an
informed one.  In view of the foregoing, it is the opinion of the
Board that further development, as indicated below, is desirable.
Accordingly, the case is REMANDED to the RO for the following
actions:

1.  The veteran should be contacted and
asked to provide the names and addresses of
VA and non-VA health care providers who
have recently treated him for his
gastrointestinal disability.  After
obtaining necessary authorization to obtain
medical information, the RO should request
those reports that have not been previously
secured.  These should include the complete
clinical records from D. T. Darnell, M.D.,
since 1991.

2.  Thereafter, the veteran should be
scheduled for a VA gastroenterology
examination in order to determine the
current extent of the residuals of the
veteran's partial gastrectomy.  The
examiner should be requested to include the
veteran's employment history and any time
lost from employment due to the service-
connected disability.  All necessary tests
should be performed.  The extent of all
manifestations of the disability, including
weight loss, diarrhea, anemia and any
associated symptoms should be reported.
The claims folder should be made available
to the examiner for review in connection
with the examination.

3.  Thereafter, in light of the evidence
received in connection with the additional
development of the claim, the RO should
readjudicate the issue on appeal.  The
rating should reflect consideration of the
applicability of 38 C.F.R. § 3.321(b)(1).

Thereafter, a supplemental statement of the case should be issued
and the veteran and his representative should be provided the
applicable time to respond.  The case should then be returned to
the Board for further consideration, if otherwise in order.  By
this REMAND, the Board intimates no opinion as to the final
outcome warranted.  No action is required of the veteran until he
is notified by the RO.

          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) (1993).