BVA9504224 
DOCKET NO.  93-07 463     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St. Louis,
Missouri

THE ISSUE

Whether the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) should furnish a
computer requested by the veteran as a necessary supply for
pursuit of vocational rehabilitation training.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Anna Bryant, Counsel

INTRODUCTION

The veteran had active military service from July 1974 to July
1977 and from February 1979 to April 1989.

This matter came to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on
appeal from a March 1992 determination by the Vocational
Rehabilitation and Counseling staff in Kansas City, Missouri,
which denied the veteran's claim seeking entitlement to a VA
supplied computer during his period of vocational rehabilitation
training.  This appeal has been processed through the St. Louis,
Missouri Regional Office (RO).

REMAND

Preliminary review of the evidentiary record reflects that the
veteran has appealed to the Board from the denial of his claim
for a computer as a necessary supply while pursuing vocational
rehabilitation training.  Essentially, the veteran maintains that
due to carpal tunnel syndrome and arthritis in his hands, he is
unable to take notes during classroom lectures without
experiencing severe pain.  In this regard, the Board observes
that additional medical evidence was received by the RO in
December 1992.  There is no indication that the RO reviewed the
physician's statement in connection with the veteran's appeal.
Pursuant to the applicable legal criteria, additional pertinent
evidence received after a statement of the case or most recent
supplemental statement of the case, requires the issuance of a
supplemental statement of the case in order to ensure that the
veteran's due process rights are not violated.  38 C.F.R. § 19.31
(1993).

The VA has a statutory duty to assist a veteran in the
development of facts pertinent to his claim.  38 U.S.C.A.
§ 5107(a) (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.103(a), 3.159 (1993).
Accordingly, further appellate consideration will be deferred and
the case is REMANDED to the RO for the following actions:

1.  The RO should attempt to contact Dr.
Trimble, who is apparently a VA physician
at the Kansas City VA Medical Center
although this is not clear, and obtain
clarification  regarding his notation dated
November 2, 1992, that the veteran "would
definitely benefit from computer use."
Specifically, the physician should be asked
to comment as to whether use of a computer
would be more medically beneficial than use
of the tape recorder and photocopied
classroom notes furnished to the veteran
and, if so, to provide supporting reasoning
for such opinion.

2.  The RO should then reevaluate the
veteran's claim in light of the additional
medical evidence received in December 1992,
as well as any response received from Dr.
Trimble.  If the determination is adverse,
the RO should furnish the veteran and his
representative with a supplemental
statement of the case in accordance with 38
U.S.C.A. § 7105 (West 1991).  This document
should further reflect detailed reasons and
bases for the decision reached.

When the above development has been completed, the veteran and
his representative should be given the opportunity to respond
thereto.  Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board
for further appellate consideration, if otherwise in order,
following appropriate appellate procedure.  The purpose of this
REMAND is to afford the veteran due process of law.  The Board
does not intimate any opinion either factual or legal, as to the
ultimate disposition warranted in this case.  No action is
required of the veteran until he is notified.

          (CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE)

          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).