BVA9505580 
DOCKET NO.  93-13 484     )       DATE
          )
          )

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

THE ISSUE

Entitlement to service connection for a disability of the right
testicle.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: Veterans of Foreign Wars of the
United States

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Mark J. Swiatek, Counsel

REMAND

The veteran had active duty from July 1988 to July 1990.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board)
from a November 1991 decision from the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in St. Petersburg, Florida.

The veteran contends, in essence, that he had the first episode
of right testicle pain after strenuous physical training during
military service.  The representative has requested that the case
be returned to the RO in order that the veteran's service medical
records may be obtained and to obtain further medical examination
recommended by the VA examiner in May 1991.  The record shows
that in October 1991, the RO was advised by the National
Personnel Records Center to contact the veteran's Army National
Guard unit for medical records at the address provided.  It does
not appear that RO requested records from the National Guard.
Regarding the May 1991 VA examination, it was the opinion of the
examiner that if the veteran's problem persisted, he should have
"at some point" an ultrasound test to rule out any testicular
masses.

In view of the foregoing, the case is REMANDED to the RO for the
following development:

1.  The RO should make another attempt to
secure the veteran's complete, original
service medical records through official
channels.

2.  The RO should obtain the names and
addresses of all medical care providers who
treated the veteran for a right testicle
disorder since service.  After securing the
necessary release, the RO should obtain all
records that have not previously been
obtained.

3.  The veteran should then be afforded a
VA urology examination to determine the
nature and extent of any right testicle
disorder found.  The claims folder should
be made available to the examiner for
review before the examination.  All special
studies deemed necessary for a
comprehensive evaluation should be
obtained, to include ultrasound testing or
other non invasive procedure.

4.  After the development requested has
been completed to the extent possible, the
RO should readjudicate the issue on appeal.

If the benefit sought is not granted, 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.

          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) (1994).