BVA9500107 
DOCKET NO.  93-10 939     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in
Newark, New Jersey

THE ISSUE

Entitlement to service connection for defective hearing.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: The American Legion

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Christopher Maynard, Associate Counsel

REMAND

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

The veteran contends that he was treated for a hearing problem on
several occasions while serving in the Pacific area during
service and believes that his hearing loss is due to the exposure
to acoustic trauma in service.

A June 1978 private medical report indicated that the veteran had
a 35-year history of hearing loss due to noise exposure related
to gunfire dating back to 1943.  In an accompanying letter from
M. L. Ronis, M.D., it was noted that the veteran also had a
history of a head and neck injury (concussion) in 1959 and had
had chronic problems with dizziness and disequilibrium since the
accident.  Dr. Ronis concluded that the veteran's cochlear and
vestibular dysfunctions were of separate etiology, but he did not
elaborate any further.

A VA audiological examination in March 1992 indicated that the
veteran had bilateral high frequency sensorineural hearing loss
and noise induced cochlear damage.  The etiology of the hearing
loss was not indicated nor does it appear that the examiner(s)
had an opportunity to review the claims folder or had knowledge
of the veteran's history of a head injury in 1959.

In light of the veteran's claim and the current medical evidence
of record, it is the decision of the Board that additional
development is necessary prior to appellate review.  Accordingly,
the case is REMANDED to the RO for the following action:

1.  The veteran should be afforded a
special examination for VA by an ear, nose
and throat specialist in order to ascertain
the nature and likely etiology of his
current hearing loss.  All indicated
testing should be performed with this
evaluation in order to fully evaluate the
veteran's condition.  A full clinical
history should be elicited from the veteran
in connection with this evaluation, and the
examiner should review the entire record in
order that she/he can offer an opinion as
to the medical probability that the current
hearing impairment is the result of
exposure to acoustic trauma in service, as
claimed by the veteran.  The claims folder
and a copy of this REMAND should be made
available to the examiner for review before
the examination.  The examination should be
conducted in accordance with the guidelines
set out in the Physician's Guide for
Disability Evaluation Examinations (IB 11-
56, March 1, 1985).  The findings should by
typed or otherwise recorded in a legible
manner for review purposes.

2.  After the development requested above
has been completed, the RO should again
review the record.  If any benefit sought
on appeal, for which a notice of
disagreement has been filed, remains
denied, the veteran and his representative
should be furnished a supplemental
statement of the case and given an
opportunity to respond thereto.

Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board for
appellate disposition, if in order.  The Board intimates no
opinion as to the ultimate outcome of this case.  The veteran
need take no action unless otherwise notified.

          STEPHEN L. WILKINS
          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).