BVA9501158 
DOCKET NO.  93-07 746     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in New York, New
York

THE ISSUE

Entitlement to an increased (compensable) evaluation for
residuals of a fracture of the left wrist.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: New York Division of Veterans'
Affairs

WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL

Appellant and his spouse

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

M. Auer, Counsel

REMAND

The veteran served on active duty from January 1943 to December
1945.  This appeal arises from a rating decision of August 1992
from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), New York, New York,
Regional Office (RO).

The Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) notes that the
veteran has not received a VA examination of his left wrist
for many years.  VA has a duty to assist the veteran in the
development of facts pertinent to a well-grounded claim.
38 U.S.C.A. § 5107 (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. 3.159 (1993).
The United States Court of Veterans Appeals (Court) held,
in Proscelle v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 629, 631 (1992), that
because a claim for an increased rating is regarded as a
new claim, it is subject to the well-groundedness
requirement, and that such burden is met when an appellant
indicates that he has suffered in increase in disability.
In this case, the appellant and his wife have testified as
to increased left wrist impairment.  The Court has also
held that fulfillment of the VA's duty to assist the
veteran includes providing him with a thorough and
contemporaneous medical examination.  See Littke v.
Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 90, 92 (1990).  Accordingly, the
claim is REMANDED for the following actions:

1.  The RO should request the veteran to
identify all sources of recent treatment he
has received for his left wrist disorder.
Copies of the medical records from all
sources he identifies (not already in the
claims folder) should then be obtained and
added to the claims folder.

2.  A VA orthopedic examination should be
arranged to determine the extent and
severity of the veteran's residuals of a
fracture of the left wrist.  The
examination should be conducted in
accordance with the VA Physician's Guide
for Disability Evaluation Examinations
(1985).  The examiner should set forth
detailed findings regarding limitation of
motion and any other functional loss caused
by the residuals of a fracture of the left
wrist.  Range of motion, in terms of
degrees, with a comparison of the opposite
side should be reported.  The presence or
absence of painful motion must be reported.
The examiner should also describe any func-
tional loss the veteran may experience as a
result of pain, weakness or fatigability
and the effect of any other nonservice -
connected disorder has on the left wrist.
The claims folder, or copies of all
pertinent records, should be made available
to the examiner for  review.

The RO should then review the veteran's claims in light of all
the evidence and applicable legal criteria.  If his claim remains
denied, the veteran and his representative should be provided
with a supplemental statement of the case that includes any
additional pertinent law and regulations and a full discussion of
the evidence in his case.  The appropriate response time should
be allowed.  The case should be returned to the Board, if in
order, after compliance with all regulatory appellate procedures.
No action is required of the veteran until he is so informed.
The Board intimates no opinion as to the ultimate decision
warranted in this case, pending completion of the requested
development.

          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).