BVA9500371 
DOCKET NO.  93-09 944     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St. Louis,
Missouri

THE ISSUE

Entitlement to an increased evaluation for chronic anxiety
reaction, with depression and an affective disorder, currently
evaluated as 50 percent disabling.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans

WITNESSES AT HEARING ON APPEAL

Appellant and his spouse

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Robert P. Regan, Counsel

INTRODUCTION

The appellant served on active duty during World War II.

This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on
appeal of a December 1991 rating determination by the Department
of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) located in St.
Louis, Missouri.  Based upon the statements submitted by the
appellant and the occupational history recorded during the recent
VA examinations, it is the Board's judgment that the issue of
entitlement to a schedular 100 percent rating based upon
individual unemployability pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 4.16 (1993)
has been properly raised.

REMAND

While the case was pending before the Board, a VA compensation
examination regarding an evaluation for the appellant's
psychiatric illness, dated in April 1994, was submitted into the
record.  The RO has not had the opportunity to review this
report.  The provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 20.1304 provide that any
pertinent evidence referred to the Board by the originating
agency must be referred to the agency of original jurisdiction
for review and preparation of a Supplemental Statement of the
Case unless this procedural right is waived by the appellant or
unless the Board determines that the benefit, or benefits, to
which the evidence relates may be allowed on appeal without such
referral.  As noted above, the appellant's claim now includes the
issue of entitlement to a total rating based on unemployability.
In view of these facts, the case is REMANDED to the RO for the
following actions:

1.  The RO should obtain any additional VA
medical records covering the period from
November 7, 1992, from the VA medical facility
located in Kansas City, Missouri.

2.  The RO should readjudicate the appellant's
claim based upon all evidence of record,
including the April 1994 VA examination report.
The rating should reflect consideration of
38 C.F.R. §§ 3.321(b)(1) and 4.16(b), or 4.16(c)
if the rating is increased to 70 percent.

If the benefit sought is not granted, the appellant and his
representative should be furnished a supplemental statement of
the case, to include a discussion of the applicability of the
provisions of 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.321(b)(1) and 4.16, and an
opportunity to respond.  The case should then be returned to the
Board for further appellate consideration.

          GARY L. GICK
          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 deter-
mination.  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).