BVA9501270 
DOCKET NO.  93-08 328     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Washington, DC

THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to an increased disability evaluation for
osteoarthritis of the cervical and lumbar spine and of the
fingers of the left hand, currently evaluated as 10 percent
disabling.

2.  Entitlement to a compensable disability evaluation for a
post-operative scar of the forehead.

3.  Entitlement to a compensable disability evaluation for
residual laceration of the occipital area.

4.  Entitlement to a compensable disability evaluation for a
tonsillectomy scar.

5.  Entitlement to a compensable disability evaluation for
hemorrhoids.

6.  Entitlement to a compensable disability evaluation for benign
prostatic hypertrophy.

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Theresa M. Catino, Associate Counsel

INTRODUCTION

The issue of entitlement to service connection for atypical
carcinoid tumor has been certified  to be in appellate status.
Service connection for that disorder was denied by the regional
office in a rating decision, dated May 11, 1992.  The veteran was
notified of this adverse determination by letters dated  May 22,
1992, and June 2, 1992.  A supplemental statement of the case
including the matter of service connection for atypical carcinoid
tumor was sent to him in July 1992.  The veteran has not
submitted a notice of disagreement with respect to this issue.
Accordingly, notwithstanding the certification of appeal, dated
March 11, 1993, this matter is not in appellate status.

REMAND

The veteran retired in August 1964 after more than 23 years of
active service.  Although he had extensive military service prior
to April 1953, there do not appear to be any service medical
records before 1953 in the claims folder.

With regard to the veteran's claims of entitlement to increased
ratings for his various service-connected disabilities, the Board
notes that he has not submitted any records of outpatient or
inpatient treatment received for these disorders.   In addition,
the veteran has not been accorded a Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) examination regarding these disabilities.
Consequently, there is no medical evidence contained in the
claims file which discusses the current nature and extent of the
veteran's service-connected disabilities.

There is a duty to assist the veteran in the development of facts
pertinent to his claim.  38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991);
38 C.F.R. § 3.103(a) (1991).  This duty to assist includes the
duty to develop facts when the record before the Board is clearly
inadequate.  EF v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 324 (1991); Littke v.
Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 90 (1990).  The development of facts
includes a "thorough and contemporaneous medical examination, one
which takes into account the records of prior medical treatment,
so that the evaluation of the claimed disability will be a fully
informed one."  Green v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 121, 124 (1991).

The Board concludes that further assistance to the veteran is
required.  Accordingly, the case is REMANDED  for the following
action:

1.  The regional office should ask the
National Personnel Records Center to
conduct a special search for any additional
service medical records that may be on file
for the veteran.   Any available records
should be associated with the claims
folder.

2.  The veteran should also be contacted
and requested to furnish a complete list of
all medical personnel and facilities from
which he has received treatment for his
service-connected disabilities since 1989.
After obtaining the appropriate releases
from the veteran where necessary, the
health care providers should be  requested
to provide copies of all treatment records
in their possession pertaining to the
veteran.

3.  Thereafter, the veteran should be
afforded appropriate VA medical examination
for his service-connected disabilities.
The report(s) of examination should include
a detailed account of all manifestations of
the service-connected disabilities found to
be present.  All necessary and medically
appropriate tests should be conducted.  The
examination(s) should be accomplished in
accordance with the procedures outlined in
the VA Physicians Guide for Disability
Evaluation Examinations.

4.  After undertaking any further
development deemed necessary, the regional
office should readjudicate the issues on
appeal.

Following completion of these actions, and, if the decision
remains unfavorable, the veteran should be provided with a
supplemental statement of the case and afforded a reasonable
period of time in which to respond.  Thereafter, the appeal, in
accordance with current appellate procedures, should be returned
to the Board for completion of appellate review.

The purpose of this REMAND is to obtain clarifying evidence and
insure due process.

          JOHN E. ORMOND
          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).