BVA9501807 
DOCKET NO.  92-10 147     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Boston,
Massachusetts

THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to restoration of a 10 percent disability
evaluation for osteomyelitis of the right distal femur.

2.  Entitlement to a disability evaluation in excess of 40
percent for arthritis of the right knee.

3.  Entitlement to a disability evaluation in excess of 10
percent for spondylolisthesis, L5-S1, with spondylolysis and
radiculopathy.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans

WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL

Appellant

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

James L. March, Associate Counsel

INTRODUCTION

The veteran had active service from October 1960 to May 1962.
This appeal comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from
a November 1990 rating decision of the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Boston, Massachusetts.  In
October 1993, the Board remanded the case for further
development.

REMAND

In December 1991, the veteran raised the issue of entitlement to
a total disability rating due to individual unemployability
(TDIU).  In the October 1993 remand, the Board instructed the RO
to adjudicate this issue.  However, the RO deferred the issue and
sent the veteran a VA Form 21-4192 to complete.  The veteran
completed and returned the form, but the RO failed to adjudicate
the issue.  The veteran's representative has requested the Board
to remand the case if a TDIU could not be granted on the record
as it exists.

In light of the foregoing, the Board is remanding this case for
the following actions:

1.  The RO should contact the veteran and
request that he identify the names,
addresses, and approximate dates of
treatment for all VA and non-VA health care
providers who have treated him in recent
years for his service connected disorders.
With any necessary authorization from the
veteran, the RO should attempt to obtain
copies of pertinent treatment records
identified by the veteran in response to
this request, which have not been previously
secured.

2.  Then, the RO should arrange for a VA
orthopedic and neurological examination to
determine the current extent of his service-
connected disabilities.  Range of motion
tests and X-rays should be conducted and the
examinations should otherwise be in
accordance with the VA Physician's Guide for
Disability Evaluation Examinations.  The
examiner should be requested to comment on
the functional and industrial impairment
caused by the service-connected
disabilities.  It is imperative that the
claims folder and a copy of this REMAND be
provided to the examining physician for
review prior to the examination.

3.  The RO should readjudicate the issues on
appeal.  If it has not been rendered moot,
the TDIU claim should also be adjudicated.

If the benefits sought on appeal are not granted to the veteran's
satisfaction, the veteran and his representative should be issued
a supplemental statement of the case and be afforded a reasonable
opportunity to reply.  Thereafter, the case should be returned to
the Board for further appellate consideration, if otherwise in
order.

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

          F. JUDGE FLOWERS
          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).