BVA9501230 
DOCKET NO.  92-23 666     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Cleveland, Ohio

THE ISSUE

Entitlement to a permanent and total disability rating for
pension purposes.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: The American Legion

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Wayne A. Tonkins, Associate Counsel

INTRODUCTION

The veteran served on active duty from April 1967 to April 1970.

This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals
(hereinafter the Board) on appeal from a rating decision dated in
July 1992 from the Cleveland, Ohio, Regional Office (hereinafter
RO), which denied a permanent and total disability rating for
pension purposes.

REMAND

The veteran contends that he is unable to work due to his
physical disabilities and his very bad nerves.  In particular,
the veteran asserts that he has a chronic urinary tract
infection, prostate trouble, a hernia, sores on his right leg and
that being around people cause stress and nervousness.  The
veteran maintains that, with the overall effect of his
disabilities, he is unable to work.

In reviewing the record, this panel of the Board notes that
various precedent opinions of the United States Court of Veterans
Appeals (COVA) have had a profound impact on adjudication of
pension benefits.  For example, in Brown v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.
App. 444 (1992) it was indicated that all of the disabilities
must be rated.  Here, on the latest VA examination of May 1992,
there was evidence of a septal deviation with nasal obstruction.
This has not been formally rated.  Moreover, the rating criteria
for genitourinary disabilities have changed since the veteran's
urinary difficulties were rated.  Furthermore, the general
medical examination conducted in 1992 is not dated, and appeared
abbreviated.

Accordingly, the case is being REMANDED for the following action:

1.  The veteran should be afforded a general
medical examination to determine the present
extent and severity of his disabilities.  Any
specialty examinations deemed appropriate by
the examiner should be conducted.  The claims
folder should be made available to the
examiner for study prior to the evaluation.

2.  After completion of the above, all of the
veteran's disabilities should be formally
rated consistent with current rating
criteria.

3.  In evaluating the veteran's claim, the RO
should consider whether the veteran is
capable of more than marginal employment in
light of his work experience and wage
history.

When the above development has been completed, the case should
again be reviewed by the originating agency.  The rating board
should consider the claim under both the "average person" and
"unemployability" standards.  See C.F.R.
§§ 4.15, 4.17 (1993).  If the decision remains adverse to the
veteran, he and his representative should be furnished a
Supplemental Statement of the Case and afforded a reasonable
period to respond.  Thereafter, subject to current appellate
procedures, the case should be returned to the Board for further
appellate consideration, if appropriate.

The veteran need take no action unless he is further informed.
The purpose of this REMAND is to obtain additional evidence and
no inference should be drawn from it regarding the final
disposition of the claim.

          E. W. SEERY
          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).