BVA9504573 
DOCKET NO.  91-35 341     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Milwaukee,
Wisconsin

THE ISSUE

Whether the veteran is entitled to vocational rehabilitation
training under the provisions of Chapter 31, Title 38, United
States Code.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans

WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL

Appellant

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Anna Bryant, Counsel
INTRODUCTION

The veteran had active military service from August 1981 to July
1985.

This appeal originally came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals
(Board) on appeal from a January 1991 determination by the
Milwaukee, Wisconsin Regional Office (RO), which denied the
veteran's claim seeking entitlement to vocational rehabilitation
training pursuant to Chapter 31, Title 38, United States Code.
In May 1992, the Board remanded the case to the RO for due
process considerations.  Following completion of the requested
development by the RO, the Board entered a decision in this case
on February 10, 1993.

Subsequently, the veteran appealed to the United States Court of
Veterans Appeals (Court).  In June 1994, both parties filed a
joint motion for remand to the Board.  In an order dated July 1,
1994, the Court granted the joint motion for remand, vacated the
Board's February 10, 1993 decision, and remanded the case,
pursuant to 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252(a) (West 1991), for compliance
with the instructions contained in the joint motion for remand.
Copies of the Court's order and the joint motion for remand have
been placed in the claims file.

In order to comply with the Court's order, the Board remanded the
appeal to the RO in September 1994 for further consideration.
The case is once again before the Board for appellate review.

The Board observes that the veteran's representative has now
raised the issue of service connection for a back disorder as
secondary to the veteran's service-connected colitis with status
post colectomy.  However, this issue has not been adjudicated by
the RO and is not properly before the Board for appellate review.
Accordingly, it is referred to the RO for appropriate action.

REMAND

This case was remanded by the Board in September 1994 for further
consideration of the evidence submitted by the veteran subsequent
to the counseling psychologist's January 1991 determination,
which indicated that he was no longer employed as a parish priest
and was pursuing an education in the field of teaching.  This was
done in accordance with the joint motion and Court's order, for
the purpose of affording the veteran additional evaluation and
counseling to determine whether he now has an employment
handicap, or whether he is otherwise entitled to employment
services.

In October 1994, the counseling psychologist reviewed the
additional evidence and determined that the veteran's service-
connected disabilities do not impose an employment handicap.  It
was further concluded that he is ineligible for vocational
rehabilitation training, including employment services.  While
the supplemental statement of the case provided to the veteran in
October 1994, contains citations to the law and regulations
governing the determination of employment handicap, the criteria
governing entitlement to employment assistance were not cited.
In view of the specific instructions in the joint motion, as
incorporated in the Court's order, the Board finds that the
veteran must be given a supplemental statement of the case which
clearly explains the basis for the determination that he is not
entitled to employment assistance.  38 U.S.C.A.
§ 7105(d)(1)(B)(C) (West 1991).

Accordingly, further appellate consideration will be deferred and
the case is REMANDED to the RO for the following action:

The RO should furnish the veteran and his
representative with a supplemental
statement of the case, which sets forth
citations and explanations of the
applicable law and regulations governing
the determination regarding employment
assistance, including the applicable
provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 3117(a) (West
1991); 38 C.F.R. §§  21.47(a)(b)(c),
21.51(g) (1993).  This document should
further reflect detailed reasons and bases
for the decision reached.

Thereafter, the veteran and his representative should be given
the opportunity to respond.  The case should be returned to the
Board for further appellate consideration.  The purpose of this
REMAND is to afford the veteran due process of law and the Board
does not intimate any opinion, either legal or factual, as to the
ultimate disposition warranted in this case.

          D. C. SPICKLER
          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).