BVA9504365 
DOCKET NO.  93-25 011     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Columbia, South
Carolina

THE ISSUE

Entitlement to service connection for lupus erythematosus.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: The American Legion

WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL

The veteran

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

S. P. Candelmo, Associate Counsel

REMAND

The veteran had certified active military service from October
1991 to November 1992.  This matter came before the Board of
Veterans' Appeals (hereinafter "the Board") on appeal from a
March 1993 rating decision of the Columbia, South Carolina
Regional Office (hereinafter "the RO") which denied service
connection for lupus erythematosus.  The American Legion has
represented the veteran throughout this appeal.

The veteran asserts on appeal that the RO erred in denying
service connection for lupus erythematosus as the claimed
disability was incurred during service.  In review of the record,
the Board observes that the veteran's Certificate of Release or
Discharge from Active Duty (Form DD-214) relates that he had
prior active service totaling three months and seven days.  A
March 1992 medical evaluation board report conveys that the
veteran reported having developed facial swelling and an
erythematous rash in a malar distribution, with fever and oral
lesions while undergoing summer active duty for training in 1991.
At the September 1993 hearing on appeal, the accredited
representative stated that the veteran served in the South
Carolina National Guard from 1989 to 1991.  The veteran testified
before the hearing officer that symptoms resembling those
associated with lupus first appeared during basic training in
1989 at Fort Sill, Oklahoma.  He further stated that he received
treatment for similar symptoms during his subsequent periods of
active duty for training at Fort Bragg, North Carolina and Fort
Stewart, Georgia.  The Board notes that the veteran's active duty
for training has not been certified.  Service medical records
associated with such active duty for training have neither been
requested nor incorporated into the record.

The United States Court of Veterans Appeals (hereinafter "the
Court") has held where evidence in support of the claim may be in
the veteran's service record or other governmental records, the
Department of Veterans Affairs (hereinafter "VA") has the duty to
obtain such records in order to fully develop the facts relevant
to the claim.  Murphy v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 78, 82 (1991).

In light of the VA's duty to assist the veteran in the proper
development of his claim as mandated by the provisions of 38
U.S.C.A. § 5107(b) (West 1991) and as interpreted by the Court in
Murphy and Littke v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 90, 92-93 (1990), this
case is REMANDED for the following action:

The RO should contact the National
Personnel Records Center and/or the
appropriate service entity and request that
it (1) verify the veteran's period(s) of
active duty for training with the South
Carolina National Guard, and (2) forward
all available service medical records for
incorporation into the record.

When the requested action has been completed, and if his claim
continues to be denied, the RO should afford the veteran a
reasonable period of time in which to respond to a supplemental
statement of the case.  Thereafter, subject to current appellate
procedures, the case should be returned to the Board for further
appellate consideration if appropriate.  The veteran need not
take any action unless he is further informed.  The purpose of
this REMAND is to allow for further development of the record.
No inference should be drawn from it regarding the final
disposition of the veteran's claim.

          JEFF MARTIN
          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 is appealable to the Court.  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).