BVA9502539 
DOCKET NO.  90-18 120     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Nashville,
Tennessee

THE ISSUE

Entitlement to secondary service connection for a left knee
disorder.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: D. C. Daniel, Jr., attorney

WITNESS AT HEARINGS ON APPEAL

The veteran

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Richard V. Chamberlain, Counsel

INTRODUCTION

The veteran served on active duty from June 1974 to August 1985.

This case came to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a
November 1989 decision by the Nashville, Tennessee, Regional
Office (RO) of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) which
denied a reopened claim for secondary service connection for a
left knee disorder (claimed as secondary to a service-connected
right knee disability).  In a June 1993 decision, the Board
denied the claim.  The veteran then appealed to the United States
Court of Veterans Appeals (Court), and he appointed D. C. Daniel,
Jr., attorney at law, to provide further representation in
connection with the claim.

In a November 1994 joint motion to the Court, the parties
requested that the June 1993 Board decision be vacated and the
case remanded for further development and readjudication.  In a
November 1994 order, the Court granted the parties' motion, and
the case was thereafter returned to the Board.  In December 1994
the Board asked the veteran's attorney whether he wanted to
submit additional written argument, and such was submitted later
that month.

REMAND

Copies of the November 1994 joint motion and Court order have
been placed in the veteran's claims folder.  These documents
require further action by the RO, and thus the case is REMANDED
for the following:

1.  The RO should instruct the veteran to
prepare a detailed list (names, addresses,
and dates) of all VA or non-VA medical
treatment or examination he has received
for problems with either knee since his
August 1985 discharge from service.  The RO
should then obtain copies of all identified
records not already in the claims folder.

The RO should assure that the records
obtained include those of reported
treatment and a doctors opinion on
secondary service connection, from the VA
Medical Center (VAMC) in Murfreesboro,
Tennessee.  (Such records are apparently
from 1986, are referenced in the veteran's
July 15, 1986 statement in support of
claim, and are specifically referred to in
the November 1994 joint motion of the
parties which was submitted to the Court.)

The RO should also assure that it obtains
records from the VAMC in San Antonio,
Texas.  (Such records are apparently from
1986, are referenced in the transcript of
the veteran's February 1990 RO hearing, and
are specifically referred to in the
November 1994 joint motion of the parties
which was submitted to the Court.
References to the "Sanantonion Medical
Center" apparently mean the San Antonio
VAMC.  See list of treatment sources on the
veteran's August 1986 VA compensation
examination, October 1986 RO deferred
rating decision, and October 1986 request
for records on VA Forms 10-7131.)

2.  After all the above records are
obtained and added to the claims folder,
the RO should have the veteran undergo a VA
compensation examination to determine the
nature and etiology of a left knee
disorder.  The claims folder must be made
available to and reviewed by the examiner.
All indicated tests should be performed,
and the doctor should diagnose all current
left knee disorders.  Following examination
and review of the historical records, the
doctor should provide a medical opinion on
whether or not the veteran's service-
connected right knee disability is the
etiological cause of a current left knee
disorder(s); the doctor should set forth in
detail the rationale for his/her opinion.

Thereafter, the RO should review the claim for secondary service
connection for a left knee disorder.  If the claim is denied, the
veteran and his attorney should be issued a supplemental
statement of the case and given an opportunity to respond.  Then
the case should be returned to the Board.

          L. W. TOBIN
          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).