BVA9500168 
DOCKET NO.  93-05 864     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Des Moines,
Iowa

THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to service connection for the residuals of
malaria.

2.  Entitlement to service connection for a chronic disease of
the auditory canal.

3.  Entitlement to service connection for the residuals of an
injury to the right forefinger.

4.  Entitlement to service connection for residual scars of the
face and arms.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: The American Legion

WITNESSES AT HEARING ON APPEAL

Appellant and his spouse

INTRODUCTION

The veteran had active military service from February 1941 to
November 1945.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board)
on appeal from rating decisions of the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) of Des Moines, Iowa.

REMAND

The VA has a duty to assist a veteran in developing facts
pertinent to a potentially well grounded claim.  38 U.S.C.A.
§ 5107(a) (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.103, 3.159 (1993).  That
duty includes obtaining medical records and medical examinations
where indicated by the facts and circumstances of an individual
case.  See Murphy v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 78 (1990); Littke v.
Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 90 (1990).  It is unclear, based on the
development thus far, whether this claim is well grounded within
the meaning of the law.  Further development must be initially
undertaken in order to make an informed judgment on that point.

The veteran has contended that the disabilities at issue were
incurred in service.  Attempts to locate his service medical
records have been unsuccessful.  Those records were apparently
destroyed in the accidental fire at the National Personnel
Records center in 1973.  Attempts to locate records of the U.S.
Army Office of the Surgeon General (SGO) and from the Lutheran
Hospital have likewise been unsuccessful.  It has also been
reported that there are no records available from the private
physician who treated the veteran right after service.

The claims folder appears to be a rebuilt folder, with no medical
information contained therein prior to 1991.  The veteran has
received recent treatment at VA facilities, but it is not clear
when this treatment started.  A determination should be made as
to whether there was treatment by the VA prior to 1991, and if
so, those records should be requested.  Additionally, the veteran
has not had a comprehensive physical examination to ascertain
whether there are any identifiable residuals for which service
connection could be granted.

In view of the foregoing, this case is REMANDED for the following
actions:

1.  The RO should ascertain from the
veteran when he first sought treatment at
VA facilities.  If it was before 1991,
those records should be requested.
Additionally, the veteran should be
requested to provide the names of any
private health care providers from whom he
has received treatment since service--to
include whether his employer after service
may have had physical examinations
conducted.  Appropriate release of
information forms should be requested, and
the RO should attempt to obtain copies of
any records to which reference is made.

2.  Thereafter the veteran should be
scheduled for a comprehensive VA
examination, to include a determination of
whether there are any residuals of malaria,
an injury of the right forefinger, and
scars on the face and arms identified.  It
should also be determined whether the
veteran has signs of a chronic or
continuing infection of either auditory
canal.  All indicated tests should be
performed and all clinical findings should
be reported in detail.  The claims folder
should be made available to the examiner
for review prior to the examination.

When the aforementioned development has been accomplished the
case should be reviewed by the RO.  In the event the benefits
sought are not granted, the veteran and his representative should
be provided with a supplemental statement of the case and
afforded a reasonable opportunity to respond thereto.
Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board for further
appellate consideration.  No action is required of the veteran
until he is notified.

          MICHAEL D. LYON
          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).