BVA9506320 
DOCKET NO.  93-12 352     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Huntington,
West Virginia

THE ISSUE

Whether new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen a
claim for service connection for a left shoulder disorder.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: The American Legion

WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL

Appellant

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

James Douglas, Associate Counsel
INTRODUCTION

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA or
Board) on appeal from a September 1991 rating decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office in
Huntington, West Virginia, (RO) which denied the benefit sought
on appeal.  The veteran, who had active service from October 1961
to August 1962, appealed the decision to the BVA, and the case
was received at the Board in June 1993.

REMAND

A preliminary review of the veteran's claim for a service
connection for a left shoulder disorder, which was originally
denied by a December 1981 rating decision, discloses that the RO
determined that new and material evidence has not been submitted
to reopen the previously denied claim.  However, the letter
provided by the veteran's private physician, Dr. James K. Walker,
D.O., appears to offer an opinion that the veterans current left
shoulder disorder may be attributable to an injury the veteran
sustained while in service.  In this regard, however, Dr. Walker
reported treating the veteran only from 1986 and he apparently
relied on the veteran's history of injury in service because it
does not appeal that Dr. Walker had the benefit of review of the
veteran's service medical records and other post service records
in the claims folder.

Additionally, Dr. Walker's letter states that  the veteran was
treated by three other physicians prior to December 1986.
Although the Board also notes that at his hearing the veteran
claimed to have received his first post-service treatment for his
shoulder in 1964, but he could not remember the name of the
doctor, and indicated that records of such treatment had been
lost, it is unclear whether records from the other physicians he
said had provided pertinent treatment might be available and be
supportive of the veteran's request to reopen his claim.

Given the opinion from Dr. Walker and notice of possible sources
of additional information, the Board is persuaded that further
development is warranted in connection with the appeal.

Therefore, in order to give the veteran every consideration with
respect to the present appeal, the case is REMANDED for the
following actions:

          1.  The veteran should be requested to
provide authorization for release of all
records of treatment for the left shoulder
from Dr. Edward Jackson, "Dr. Solsby" and
Dr. Anthony Graham.  Copies of such records
should then be requested, especially any
available records of treatment prior to
December 1986.

          2.  The veteran should be afforded an
orthopedic examination of his left shoulder
to ascertain the nature, etiology and
pathology of all disorders of the shoulder
which may be present.  Any and all
indicated evaluations, studies, and tests
deemed necessary by the examiner should be
accomplished.  The examiner is specifically
requested to review all pertinent medical
records from both during and after service,
and offer comments and an opinion
concerning the degree of probability, if
any, that any left shoulder disorder
currently present is causally or
etiologically related to any injury
incurred during the veteran's service.  The
claims folder must be made available to the
examiner for review in connection with the
examination.

3.  After the development requested in the
first two paragraphs has been completed,
the RO should once again determine whether
new and material evidence has been
submitted to reopen the veteran's claims
for service connection for residuals of a
left shoulder injury.  Unless the claim is
reopened and service connection for a left
shoulder disability is granted, the veteran
and his representative should be furnished
a supplemental statement of the case and be
afforded the applicable time period to
respond before the records are returned to
the Board for further review.

The purpose of this REMAND is to obtain additional development,
and the Board does not intimate any opinion as to the merits of
the case, either favorable or unfavorable, at this time.  No
action is required of the veteran until he is notified.

          CHARLES E. HOGEBOOM
          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).