BVA9501309 
DOCKET NO.  93-04 328     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Montgomery,
Alabama

THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to an increased rating for post-traumatic stress
disorder, currently evaluated as  30 percent disabling.

2.  Entitlement to a total rating under the provisions of 38
C.F.R. § 4.29 (1993) based upon hospitalization from
August 26, 1991 and September 20, 1991.

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

A. D. Jackson, Associate Counsel

INTRODUCTION

The veteran had active duty service from November 1961 to January
1970.

This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on
appeal from a rating decision from the Montgomery, Alabama,
Regional Office (RO).  The rating decision dated in January 1992,
denied an increased rating for post-traumatic stress disorder and
a total rating under the provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 4.29 (1993)
based upon hospitalization from August 26, 1991 and
September 20, 1991.

REMAND

The veteran contends that he should be granted a higher rating for
post-traumatic stress disorder, currently rated as 30 percent
disabling because the RO did not take into account or properly
weigh the evidence of record, including VA clinical evidence and
statements submitted in support of the claim.  The veteran argues
that he is required to undergo periodic psychiatric treatment for
post-traumatic stress disorder.  He further claims that he was
hospitalized between the dates of August 26, 1991 and
September 20, 1991 for a period in excess of 21 days due to his
service connected psychiatric disability.

After a review of the record it is found that further development
is warranted.  The veteran has apparently not undergone a formal
Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA) psychiatric examination
since 1987.  A review of the claims file indicates
that the veteran underwent psychiatric hospitalization in
November and again in December 1992.  These records are not
before the Board.  As the Board's "fulfill-ment of the statutory
duty to assist...includes the conduct of a thorough and
contemporaneous medical examination, one that takes into account
the records
of prior medical treatment, so that the evaluation of the claimed
disability will be a fully informed one," Green v. Derwinski,
1 Vet. App. 121 (1991), we are requesting further development.
It is also noted that updated psychiatric information, to include
a formal diagnosis, is a necessary prerequisite to a review of
the claim for benefits under 38 C.F.R. 4.29 (1993).

To ensure that the VA has met its duty to assist the appellant in
developing the facts pertinent to the claim, the case is REMANDED
to the RO for the following development:

1.  The RO should initiate appropriate
efforts to secure any records pertaining to
the veteran developed at the VA medical
center in Tuskegee, Alabama since 1992.
The RO should associate all recent
outpatient treatment records as well as the
hospital inpatient records with the claims
folder.

2.  The veteran should be afforded a VA
psychiatric examination to determine the
extent and severity of
his psychiatric disability.  The
examination should be conducted in
accordance with procedures outlined in the
Physician's Guide.  The psychiatrist should
also offer an assessment based on the
Global Assessment Functioning Scale.  If
several psychiatric disabilities are
present, the examiner, to the extent
possible should determine what symptoms are
related to each disability.  The claims
folder should be available for review by
the examining psychiatrist.

3.  After the development requested above
has been completed to the extent possible,
the RO should again review the record.  If
any benefit sought on appeal, for which a
notice of disagreement has been filed,
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.

          EDWARD W. SEERY
          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).