BVA9504587 
DOCKET NO.  93-05 440     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Seattle,
Washington

THE ISSUE

Entitlement to service connection for parathyroid cancer as a
result of exposure to ionizing radiation.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: The American Legion

WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL

Appellant

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

James L. March, Associate Counsel

INTRODUCTION

The veteran had active service from September 1942 to January
1946.  This appeal comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals
(Board) from a rating decision of the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Seattle, Washington.
Service connection for thyroid cancer as a result of exposure to
ionizing radiation has been granted.

REMAND

The RO denied entitlement to service connection for parathyroid
cancer on the ground that parathyroid cancer is not a radiogenic
disease included in 38 C.F.R. § 3.311b or a disease subject to
presumptive service connection on a radiation basis under
38 C.F.R. § 3.309.

During the pendency of this appeal, the United States Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit determined that section 5 of the
Veterans' Dioxin and Radiation-Exposure Compensation Standards
Act of 1984, Pub. L. No. 98-542, 98 Stat. 2725, 2727-29, did not
preclude, or authorize VA to preclude, a veteran from proving
that he has a disability as a result of exposure to ionizing
radiation under the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 1110 (West 1991)
and 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d) (1993), despite the fact that the
claimed disability is not a potentially radiogenic disease under
38 C.F.R. § 3.311b (now § 3.311).  Combee v. Brown, 34 F.3d 1039
(Fed. Cir. 1994), reversing in part Combee v. Principi,
4 Vet.App. 78 (1993).  In such cases, a veteran must be given an
opportunity to prove that his exposure to ionizing radiation
during service actually caused his claimed disability and that
service connection is therefore warranted under 38 U.S.C.A.
§§ 1110, 1131, and 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d).

In light of the foregoing circumstances, the Board concludes that
a remand is warranted.  Accordingly, the case is REMANDED to the
RO for the following actions:

1.  The RO should afford the veteran an
opportunity to submit additional evidence
in support of his claim.

2.  Thereafter, the RO should undertake any
indicated development and then readjudicate
the appellant's claim of entitlement to
service connection for parathyroid cancer
as a result of radiation exposure in light
of the Federal Circuit's decision in
Combee v. Brown, supra.

If the benefit sought on appeal is not granted to the veteran's
satisfaction, the RO should issue a supplemental statement of the
case, and the veteran should be provided an opportunity to
respond.  The case should then be returned to the Board for
further appellate consideration, if otherwise in order.

In taking this action, the Board implies no conclusion as to the
ultimate outcome warranted.  No action is required of the veteran
unless he is otherwise notified by the RO.

          SHANE A. DURKIN
          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).