BVA9501649 
DOCKET NO.  93-06 160     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Portland,
Oregon

THE ISSUE

Whether the veteran is eligible for Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) training and rehabilitation under Chapter 31, Title
38, United States Code.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans

WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL

Appellant

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Alan S. Peevy, Associate Counsel

INTRODUCTION

The veteran had active military service from March 1967 to
December 1970.

This case is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on
appeal from an August 1992 determination by a counseling
psychologist of the Vocational Rehabilitation and Counseling
Division at the Portland, Oregon, Regional Office (RO).  The
veteran's notice of disagreement was received in August 1992.  A
statement of the case was issued in December 1992, and a
substantive appeal was received that same month.  The veteran
testified at a personal hearing at the RO in February 1993.

The veteran is represented by the Disabled American Veterans.

REMAND

As noted in the introduction, the veteran appeared at a personal
hearing at the RO in February 1993.  Preliminary review of the
claims file reveals that the veteran submitted new documentary
evidence at the hearing.  Specifically, the veteran submitted an
original letter, dated January 25, 1993, from Janet Rawlinson,
M.D.  In this communication, Dr. Rawlinson commented on the
veteran's disability in relation to his claim for vocational
rehabilitation.  However, it does not appear that a supplemental
statement of the case was furnished to the veteran and his
representative pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 19.31 (1993).  Under that
regulation, a supplementary statement of the case is required
following a hearing before the RO when new documentary evidence
is presented.

Accordingly, the case is hereby REMANDED to the RO for the
following action:

The RO should review the claim taking
into account all evidence currently of
record, including the letter from Dr.
Rawlinson.  If the claim is not
resolved to the appellant's
satisfaction, the RO should furnish the
veteran and his representative with a
supplemental statement of the case
which contains a summary of the
evidence, including all evidence
received since the December 1992
statement of the case, a citation to
applicable laws and regulations, and a
detailed analysis of the reasons for
the RO's decision.  After affording the
veteran and his representative a
reasonable opportunity to respond, the
case should be returned to the Board
for further appellate review.

The purpose of this decision is to ensure that regulatory
requirements are complied with.  The Board intimates no opinion
as to the eventual determination to be made in this case.

          G. H. SHUFELT
          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).