BVA9503385 
DOCKET NO.  93-11 673     )       DATE
          )
          )

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

THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to an increase in the currently assigned 10
percent evaluation for residuals of peptic ulcer disease
including vagotomy residuals, duodenal deformity and recurrent
gastritis.

2.  Entitlement to an increased (compensable) evaluation for
sinus problems with headaches.

3.  Entitlement to an increased (compensable) evaluation for
residuals of a fracture of the left ulna and radius with radial
deviation.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: The American Legion

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

C. D. Hayden, Counsel

INTRODUCTION

The veteran performed active duty from April 1969 to December
1971 and from January 1977 to August 1992.

This matter has come before the Board of Veterans' Appeals
(Board) on appeal from a January 1993 rating decision by the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), Regional Office in
Montgomery, Alabama, (RO).

As pointed out by the representative, the veteran, in his
February 1993 Notice of Disagreement, argued that the RO failed
to make a determination regarding his knees.  However, the
January 1993 rating action denied service connection for chronic
disability of the knees and the veteran was notified of this
action that same month.  That matter is not currently developed
for appellate review.

REMAND

An allegation of increased disability generally establishes a
well-grounded claim.  Proscelle v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 269
(1992).  The VA has the duty to assist appellants in developing
the facts pertinent to their claims.  38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West
1991).

The appealed evaluations have been assigned on the basis of
findings in the service medical records.  The veteran has
requested that he be given a current examination by the VA.
Where the reasonable probability of a valid claim is indicated, a
VA examination will be authorized.  38 C.F.R. § 3.326 (1994).  A
current examination report would be pertinent to the veteran's
claim.

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following additional
development:

1.  The veteran should be invited to
identify or submit any additional evidence
he wishes to have considered.  If he
chooses to identify such evidence, he
should provide sufficient detail such as
the name of any examining and/or treating
physician(s) and/or facility(ies) and the
approximate date(s) of examination or
treatment.  He should also be requested to
authorize the release of any medical
information and be furnished the necessary
forms to do so.  The RO should assist the
veteran in obtaining all information
identified by him.

2.  When the foregoing records have been
obtained, or the veteran indicates there is
no additional information he wishes to have
considered, he should be examined
to determine the extent of disability from
his gastrointestinal disorder, sinus
disorder, and residuals of the fractured
left arm.  The examination should be
conducted in accordance with the
Physician's Guide for Disability Evaluation
Examinations (Physician's Guide) and should
include all indicated tests and studies.
The examiner should be requested to obtain
a complete history from the veteran
including a description of the
manifestations of his peptic ulcer disease,
frequency and duration of exacerbations as
well as a record of the symptomatology
during such exacerbations, also, a complete
history of the frequency and severity of
headaches should be obtained.  The examiner
should also be requested to comment upon
any impairment of grip strength in the
veteran's left hand or, if possible,
measure grip strength in each hand.  The
claims folder should be made available to
the examiner prior to the examination.

3.  When the foregoing development has been
completed, the appealed issues should be
reevaluated by the RO.

If the benefits sought on appeal are not granted to the veteran's
satisfaction, he and his representative should be furnished a
supplemental statement of the case and afforded a suitable
opportunity to respond.  Thereafter, the case should be returned
to the Board in accordance with the procedures for processing
appeals.

No further action is required of the veteran until he receives
further notice.  By this REMAND, the Board intimates no opinion,
factual or legal, regarding the decision warranted pending
completion of the requested development.

          THOMAS J. DANNAHER
          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).