BVA9504385 
DOCKET NO.  93-09 029     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in
Montgomery, Alabama

THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to service connection for a back disability.

2.  Entitlement to an increased (compensable) rating for the
residuals of an injury to the right ankle.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: Edward T. Hines, Attorney at Law

WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL

The veteran

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Ripley P. Schoenberger, Counsel

INTRODUCTION

The veteran had active duty from December 1965 to December 1968.

This appeal arises from a May 1992 rating decision by the RO.

One of the issues developed for appellate review was entitlement
to service connection for post traumatic stress disorder.
However, by a rating decision of October 1992, the RO granted
service connection for post traumatic stress disorder, and
assigned a 10 percent evaluation.  The veteran has not disagreed,
and the grant of service connection is a substantial grant of the
benefit sought with regard to that issue.  This appeal is limited
to the two issues listed on the title page of this decision.

REMAND

At his personal hearing the veteran testified that he had back
trouble in 1977.  However, the earliest medical records
associated with the claims folder are dated in 1987.

The Board notes that the veteran was last afforded a VA
orthopedic examination in January 1992.  In addition, in
September 1994, the veteran appointed Mr. Edward T. Hines as his
power of attorney.  Mr. Hines has not yet had an opportunity to
review the claims folder.

To ensure that the VA has met its duty to assist the claimant in
developing the facts pertinent to the claim and to ensure full
compliance with due process requirements, the case is REMANDED to
the RO for the following development:

1.  The RO should take appropriate steps to
obtain the names and addresses of all
medical care providers who treated the
veteran for back problems in 1977.  After
securing the necessary release, the RO
should obtain these records.

2.  The veteran should be afforded a VA
orthopedic examination to determine the
ethology of his back problems, and the
current severity of the service connected
residuals of the injury to the right ankle.
Any indicated testing indicated should be
done in this regard.  The claims folder
should be made available to the examiner
for review before the examination.

3.  After the requested development has
been completed, including a readjudication
of the veteran's claims, the RO should take
appropriate steps to let the veteran's
representative, Mr. Edward T. Hines, review
the claims folder and offer any arguments
he has in support of the veteran's
position.  Thereafter, if any benefit
sought on appeal remains denied, the
appellant and representative should be
furnished a supplemental statement of the
case and given the opportunity to respond
thereto.

Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board, if in
order.  The Board intimates no opinion as to the ultimate outcome
of this case.  The appellant need take no action unless otherwise
notified.

          THOMAS J. DANNAHER
          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).