BVA9505861 
DOCKET NO.  93-13 975     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Jackson,
Mississippi

THE ISSUE

Entitlement to an increased rating for residuals of a shell
fragment wound of the right chest, with injury to Muscle Group
II, currently rated 20 percent disabling.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: The American Legion

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Mark J. Swiatek, Counsel

INTRODUCTION

The veteran had active duty from March 1950 to May 1952.  This
matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a
December 1991 decision from the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA) Regional Office (RO) in Jackson, Mississippi.

In a June 1991 communication to the RO, the veteran appeared to
raise the issue of an increased rating for residuals of a shell
fragment wound of the right leg.  The issue has not been
adjudicated.  It is referred to the RO for appropriate action.

REMAND

The veteran contends, in essence, that the record supports a
higher rating for the  residuals of a shell fragment wound of the
right chest.  The representative has asserted that a decision
should not have been made without benefit of a comprehensive
neurologic examination.  The record includes a September 1991 VA
neurologic examination report wherein the examiner stated that a
detailed examination of the veteran's extremities was not done.
The scar of the right side of the chest was described as not
tender to palpation but somewhat depressed.  The impression was
post-traumatic scar with pain probably due to neuroma formation
at the right chest intercostal region.

On reexamination in October 1992, however, an examiner reported
the scar to be mildly tender and atrophic, with some muscle loss
in the area.  Neither examination described any limitation of
function of the right upper extremity that may be related to the
service-connected disability.  The veteran stated in his
substantive appeal that when he worked he had had problems with
his arm, and had nerve damage due to treatment he received for
his chest.  A review of VA outpatient reports shows that right
upper extremity complaints of undermined etiology were reported
on several occasions from January to November 1990.

In view of the foregoing and to ensure that the VA has met its
duty to assist the claimant in developing the facts pertinent to
the claim and to ensure full compliance with due process
requirements, the case is REMANDED to the RO for the following
development:

1.  The RO should obtain the names and
addresses of all medical care providers who
treated the veteran for a right upper
extremity disability since service, and
recently for residuals of a shell fragment
wound of the right chest.  After securing
the necessary release, the RO should obtain
those records which have not previously
been obtained.

2.  The veteran should be afforded a VA
orthopedic and neurologic examinations to
determine the current extent and severity
of his right chest shell fragment wound
residuals (Muscle Group II).  The claims
folder should be made available to the
examiner for review before the examination.
The examination report should include a
medical history with notation of any time
lost from employment due to the service-
connected disability.  Any special studies
or consultations with other specialists
deemed necessary for comprehensive
evaluation should be obtained.  The
examiners should identify any disability of
the right upper extremity related to
residuals of the right chest shell fragment
wound (as distinct from impairment
attributable to other conditions).

3.  Thereafter, the RO should readjudicate
the issue on appeal to include
consideration of 38 C.F.R. § 3.321 (b)(1).

Unless the benefit sought is granted to the satisfaction of the
veteran, a supplemental statement of the case should then be
prepared and furnished to the veteran and his representative.
They should be provided the applicable period in which to
respond.  Thereafter, in accordance with the proper appellate
procedures, the case should be returned to the Board for further
appellate review, if otherwise in order.  In taking this action,
the Board implies no conclusion, either legal or factual, as to
any final outcome warranted.  No action is required of the
veteran until he is otherwise 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 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) (1994).