BVA9505761 
DOCKET NO.  93-08 465     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Baltimore,
Maryland

THE ISSUES

1.  Whether new and material evidence has been submitted to
reopen a claim of entitlement to service connection for
cardiovascular disability on a secondary basis.

2.  Entitlement to service connection for stomach disability, to
include on a secondary basis.

3.  Entitlement to service connection for lung disability.

4.  Entitlement to service connection for skin disability.

5.  Entitlement to service connection for genitourinary
disability.

6.  Entitlement to service connection for right wrist disability.

7.  Entitlement to service connection for back disability.

9.  Entitlement to service connection for arthritis of the legs.

REPRESENTATION

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

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

James L. March, Associate Counsel

INTRODUCTION

The veteran had active service from May 1966 to June 1973.  This
appeal comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a
July 1992 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA) Regional Office (RO) in Baltimore, Maryland.

REMAND

The Board notes that the veteran has raised several issues which
have not been adjudicated by the RO.  Specifically, the issue of
service connection for diverticulosis has been raised.  In the
veteran's Substantive Appeal, he discussed a disability of the
colon, bilateral hand disability and left wrist disability.  The
RO should obtain clarification from the veteran whether he is
seeking service connection for these disabilities.

The veteran's claims for service connection for lung and skin
disability are based, at least in part, upon his Agent Orange
exposure.  A decision on the Agent Orange aspect of these claims
was deferred by the RO pending the issuance of new VA
regulations.  As VA has issued new Agent Orange regulations, the
RO should adjudicate these issues as well.

In light of the foregoing circumstances, the Board concludes that
further RO actions are warranted.  Accordingly, the case is
REMANDED to the RO for the following actions:

1.  The RO should contact the veteran and
inquire whether he is seeking service
connection for disability of the colon,
bilateral hand disability and left wrist
disability.

2.  The RO should contact the veteran and
request that he identify the names,
addresses, and approximate dates of
treatment for all VA and non-VA health care
providers who may possess additional records
pertinent to any of his claims.  With any
necessary authorization from the veteran,
the RO should attempt to obtain copies of
pertinent treatment records identified by
the veteran which have not been previously
secured.

3.  Then, the RO should arrange for a VA
examination of the veteran by a board-
certified dermatologist, if available, to
determine the current nature and severity of
any skin disability present.  It is
imperative that the claims folder and a copy
of this Remand be provided to the examining
physician for review prior to the
examination.  All indicated studies should
be conducted.  The examiner should render an
opinion as to whether it is at least as
likely as not that the veteran has chloracne
or an acneform disease consistent with
chloracne.

4.  Thereafter, the RO should undertake any
other indicated development, adjudicate the
issue of entitlement to service connection
for diverticulosis, adjudicate any other
claims identified by the veteran in response
to the above clarification directive, and
readjudicate the issues currently on appeal,
to include consideration of the new criteria
applicable to claims based upon exposure to
Agent Orange.

If the benefits sought on appeal are not granted to the veteran's
satisfaction or a timely notice of disagreement is received with
respect to any other matter, the veteran and his representative
should be issued a supplemental statement of the case on all
issues in appellate status and be afforded a reasonable
opportunity to reply.  Thereafter, the case should be returned to
the Board for further appellate consideration, if otherwise in
order.

In taking this action, the Board implies no conclusion as to any
ultimate outcome warranted.  No action is required of the veteran
until he is otherwise notified by the RO.

          SHANE A. DURKIN
          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) (1994).