BVA9506263 
DOCKET NO.  91-12 900     )       DATE
          )
          )

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

THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to an increased disability evaluation for
residuals of a right total hip arthroplasty, currently evaluated
as 50 percent disabling.

2.  Entitlement to an increased disability evaluation for
degenerative arthritis of the cervical spine with nerve root
irritation, currently evaluated as 20 percent disabling.

3.  Entitlement to an increased disability evaluation for
degenerative arthritis of the right knee, currently evaluated as
20 percent disabling.

4.  Entitlement to an increased disability evaluation for
degenerative arthritis of the left knee, currently evaluated as
20 percent disabling.

5.  Entitlement to a total rating for compensation purposes based
on individual unemployability.

6.  Entitlement to special monthly compensation benefits based on
a need for regular aid and attendance or at the housebound rate.
REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

J. T. Hutcheson, Associate Counsel

REMAND

The veteran had active military service from December 1942 to
January 1946.  This matter came before the Board of Veterans'
Appeals (hereinafter "the Board") on appeal from an October 1988
rating decision of the Montgomery, Alabama Regional Office
(hereinafter "the RO") which recharacterized the veteran's
service-connected right hip disorder as residuals of a right
total hip arthroplasty evaluated as 100 percent disabling
effective between June 26, 1988 and August 31, 1989 and as 30
percent disabling on and after September 1, 1989.  In May 1991,
the Board remanded this appeal to the RO for additional action.
In December 1991, the Board again remanded this appeal to the RO
for additional action.  In June 1992, the RO increased the
disability evaluation for the veteran's service-connected right
hip disorder from 30 to 50 percent; increased the disability
evaluations for the veteran's service-connected degenerative
arthritis of the right knee and the left knee from 10 to 20
percent; and denied both a total rating for compensation purposes
based on individual unemployability and special month
compensation based on the need for regular aid and attendance or
at the housebound rate.  In April 1994, the Board remanded this
appeal to the RO for additional development of the record.  The
veteran has been represented throughout this appeal by the
Disabled American Veterans.

In reviewing the claims file, the Board observes that the
accredited representative advances in his October 1994 written
statement that increased disability evaluations are currently
warranted for the veteran's service-connected degenerative
arthritis of the left shoulder and the left hip.  These issues
have neither been developed nor certified for review on appeal.
As the veteran's entitlement to both a total rating for
compensation purposes based on individual unemployability and
special monthly compensation benefits at the housebound rate is
dependent upon an accurate assessment of his service-connected
disabilities, the Board concludes that a failure to concurrently
resolve both the certified issues and the veteran's entitlement
to increased disability evaluations for his service-connected
left shoulder disorder and left hip disorder would be contrary to
the United States Court of Veterans Appeals' (hereinafter "the
Court") holding in Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 180, 183
(1991) directing against the piecemeal review of veteran's
claims.  While regretting the delay associated with remanding the
instant appeal to allow for consideration of the additional
issues raised by the accredited representative, such action is
necessary to meet the Court's evolving guidelines.  Accordingly,
this case is REMANDED for the following action:

The RO should formally evaluate the
veteran's entitlement to increased
disability evaluations for his
service-connected degenerative arthritis of
the left shoulder and the left hip.

When the requested action has been completed, and if his claim
continues to be denied, the veteran should be afforded a
reasonable period of time in which to respond to a supplemental
statement of the case.  Thereafter, subject to current appellate
procedures, the case should be returned to the Board for further
appellate consideration if appropriate.  The veteran need not
take any action unless he is further informed.  The purpose of
this REMAND is to allow for further development of the record and
due process of law.  No inference should be drawn from it
regarding the final disposition of the veteran's claim.

          JEFF MARTIN
          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 is appealable to the Court.  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).