BVA9505236 
DOCKET NO.  93-12 861     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center in
Indianapolis, Indiana (West 10th Street)

THE ISSUE

Entitlement to payment of medical expenses incurred during
hospitalization from May 12 to 16, 1992, at St. Joseph Medical
Center.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: The American Legion

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

R. T.  Jones, Counsel

INTRODUCTION

The veteran served on active duty from November 1944 to October
1948, and has a permanent and total disability rating for pension
purposes.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board)
on appeal from a July 1992 decision by the VA Medical Center
(VAMC) in Indianapolis, Indiana (West 10th Street), which denied
the veteran's claim for payment of the costs of hospitalization
in May 1992 at a private hospital.

REMAND

Hospital records from St. Joseph Medical Center (SJMC) in
Bloomington, Illinois, reflect that the veteran was admitted to
the hospital on May 12, 1992, for chest pain which was
subsequently felt to be due to a heart attack.  The hospital
records show the veteran reported receiving outpatient care at
the VA outpatient clinic (VAOPC) or VAMC in Danville, Illinois,
and at the VAOPC in Peoria, Illinois.  The reporting physician at
SJMC, Andrew Bartolone, M.D., indicated in the "History and
Physical" completed the first day that VA had given permission
for the veteran to be hospitalized at SJMC on May 12, 1992.  The
VAMC denied the claim because (presumably) the hospitalization
had not been authorized in advance, as required by 38 C.F.R.
§ 17.50d(a) (1991); and the veteran had no service-connected
disability, as required by 38 C.F.R. § 17.80(a) (1991).

The emergency department record from SJMC indicates:

Discussed [with] Dr. Bill Graves at
Danville VA[] Hosp.  Agrees [with] SJMC
Admit [with] transfer when stable.

The file does not contain a VA Report of Contact or other
documentary evidence of this conversation.

Prior to appellate review, further development of the evidence
would be helpful.  Accordingly, the case is remanded to the VAMC
for the following actions:

1.  The VAMC should contact the Danville,
Illinois, VAMC and all the usual records
should be searched for Reports of Contact
or other documentary evidence of the
conversation.  These should include phone
logs or other records.  If no such records
are found, a statement to that effect
should be placed in the file.  The
pertinent individuals at the indicated VA
medical facility should be asked to provide
statements describing their recollection,
or non-recollection, of the conversation
alleged.

2.  After this development, the VAMC should
determine whether the hospitalization or
any portion thereof may be deemed to have
been authorized.

Thereafter, if the claim remains denied, a supplemental statement
of the case should be provided the veteran and his
representative, and they should be given an opportunity to
respond to it before the case is returned to the Board for
further review.

          J. E. DAY
          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).