BVA9504485 
DOCKET NO.  92-54 355     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St. Petersburg,
Florida

THE ISSUES

Whether new and material evidence has been presented to reopen a
claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric
disorder.

Whether new and material evidence has been presented to reopen a
claim for service connection for residuals of an orchiectomy.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans

WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL

Appellant

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Michael Martin, Associate Counsel

REMAND

The veteran had active service from March 1943 to March 1946.

In December 1992, the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board)
confirmed a decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
St. Petersburg, Florida, Regional Office (RO).  The decision held
that the veteran had not presented new and material evidence to
reopen claims for service connection for an orchiectomy and an
acquired psychiatric disorder.  The veteran appealed to the
United States Court of Veterans Appeals (Court).  In October
1994, the Court issued a memorandum decision in which it vacated
the Board's December 1992 decision and remanded the case for
readjudication.

In the memorandum decision, the Court made the following
observations:

Although the BVA properly found that the
evidence was not new and material with
respect to the claim for an acquired
psychiatric disorder, VA breached its duty
to assist.  The BVA found that "all the
evidence necessary for an equitable
disposition of the veteran's claims" had
been developed despite missing records.
The appellant has made references to
specific records regarding diagnosis of and
treatment for his nervous condition which
caused him to be hospitalized in 1972 at
Sarasota Memorial Hospital.  According to
the appellant, his physician's treatment
records from that time are unavailable, but
at his hearing in 1989 he requested that VA
obtain the hospital records.  There is no
indication in the record that VA has made
any effort to obtain the records from
Sarasota Memorial Hospital.

A copy of the Court's decision is attached.  In light of the
Court's comments, additional development of evidence is
warranted.  Accordingly, this case is remanded for the following
actions.

The RO should attempt to obtain the records
pertaining to the veteran's hospitalization
in 1972 at the Sarasota Memorial Hospital.
Any records which are obtained should be
added to the veteran's claims file.

Upon completion of the requested development of evidence, the RO
should again consider the veteran's claims.  If the benefits
sought on appeal are not granted, the RO should issue a
supplemental statement of the case to the veteran and his
representative and allow them the appropriate period of time to
respond.  Then, the case should be returned to the Board for
further appellate review.

          WARREN W. RICE, JR.
          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) (1993).