BVA9502457 
DOCKET NO.  93-11 819     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in New York, New
York

THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to service connection for dermatitis.

2.  Entitlement to service connection for cystitis.

3.  Entitlement to an increased (compensable) rating for chronic
filariasis.

4.  Entitlement to an increased (compensable) rating for
residuals of malaria.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: The American Legion

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

B. Anderson, Counsel

REMAND

The appellant had active duty from February 1942 to November
1945.  This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals
(Board) on appeal from a May 1992 rating decision of the New
York, New York regional office (RO).

Although currently characterized simply as chronic filariasis,
the earliest rating decisions show that this service-connected
entity was manifested by a thickened left spermatic cord and
epididymitis, and early examinations showed symptomatic
residuals.  The appellant claims symptomatic "left testicle"
residuals, but disability evaluation examination by the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in October 1992 did not rule
in or out the presence of such residuals.  Additionally, the
October 1992 examination indicated that the veteran was "a
regular medical clinic patient to the VAMC."  No recent VA
treatment records have been obtained and associated with the
claims folder.  Finally, the examination report reflects that a
dermatology consultation was to be requested and that the veteran
was to be scheduled for a prostatic ultrasound and laboratory
tests, and that chronic urinary infection with cystitis was a
possibility.  It is not clear from the current record whether the
additional medical development was completed or whether the
results of any such testing were available to the examiner.

In view of the foregoing, the case is REMANDED to the RO for the
following development:

1.  Copies of complete VA medical records
concerning the veteran should be obtained
and added to the claims folder.

2.  The appellant should be afforded a VA
systemic/ genitourinary examination to
determine the nature and extent of all
residuals of filariasis, to include any
left spermatic cord or testicle disorder
found to be present.  The presence of
cystitis should be ruled in or out.  If
cystitis is present, the examiner should
offer an opinion as to its etiology.
Clinical findings should be reported in
detail.  The claims folder, including the
results of the laboratory tests done in
October 1992, must be made available to the
examiner(s) for review prior to the
examination.

3.  The RO should determine whether or not
the veteran was accorded a dermatology
consultation as requested by the examiner
in October 1992.  If so, the report of the
consultation should be obtained and
associated with the claims folder.  If the
veteran was not accorded a dermatology
consultation, he should be scheduled for an
examination by a dermatologist.

After the development requested above has been completed, the RO
should again review the record.  If any benefit sought on appeal
remains denied, the appellant and representative should be
furnished a supplemental statement of the case and given the
applicable opportunity to respond thereto.  Thereafter, the case
should be returned to the Board, if in order.  The Board
intimates no opinion as to the ultimate outcome of this case.
The appellant need take no action until he is so notified.

          GARY L. GICK
          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 deter-
mination.  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 action has been taken in
accordance with the Veterans' Benefits Improvements Act of 1994,
Pub. L. No. 103-446, § 303, 108 Stat. 4645, ___ (1994), and 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).