Citation NR: 9600086	
Decision Date: 01/18/96		Archive Date: 02/06/96

DOCKET NO.  94-01 699	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St. 
Petersburg, Florida


THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to service connection for residuals of a left 
great toe injury.  

2.  Entitlement to service connection for residuals of 
diabetes mellitus.  


REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by:	The American Legion


WITNESS AT HEARINGS ON APPEAL

Appellant




REMAND

The veteran had active duty from June 1951 to December 1953.  
His service medical records are unavailable and were 
apparently destroyed in a fire at the National Personnel 
Records Center in 1973.  

The veteran essentially contends that he injured his left 
great toe during service and that during the course of 
treatment for that injury, blood testing revealed early 
indications of diabetes mellitus, which was diagnosed 
subsequent to service.  At a hearing before the Board in 
April 1994, the veteran testified that this testing occurred 
during the course of his hospitalization at the Chelsea Naval 
Hospital in Chelsea, Massachusetts in June 1952.  The 
veteran’s representative asserted that although attempts have 
been made by the regional office (RO) to obtain additional 
service medical records, there has been no specific attempt 
to obtain hospital records directly from the Chelsea Naval 
Hospital.  It should be noted that while the veteran served 
in the Air Force, available service personnel records do 
confirm that the veteran was admitted to the Chelsea Naval 
Hospital on June 9, 1952.  He testified that he was 
hospitalized and/or treated as a day patient at this facility 
for his toe injury for a period of several weeks.  

The veteran further testified that as a result of his 
treatment at the Chelsea Naval Hospital in June 1952, he 
contacted his next duty station, George Air Force Base in 
Victorville, California, in advance to notify that station of 
a possible delay in reporting for duty due to his 
hospitalization and treatment.  While the veteran’s 
representative acknowledges that attempts were made to obtain 
available morning reports of the veteran’s unit at George Air 
Force Base, it is asserted that duty logs from that 
organization should be requested and reviewed for any 
information pertaining to the veteran’s medical circumstances 
at the time.  

To ensure that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has 
met its duty to assist the claimant in developing the facts 
pertinent to the claim and to ensure full compliance with due 
process requirements, the case is REMANDED to the (RO) for 
the following development:

1.  The RO should attempt to obtain 
records of the veteran’s hospitalization 
and treatment at the Chelsea Naval 
Hospital, Chelsea, Massachusetts, in June 
1952, either directly from that facility, 
if possible, or through other appropriate 
channels.  Any records obtained should be 
associated with the claims folder.  

2.  The RO should also attempt to obtain 
any duty logs from the 131st Installation 
Squadron, 131st Air Base Group, George 
Air Force Base, Victorville, California, 
in July 1952, which contain any relevant 
information pertaining to the veteran’s 
medical circumstances at that time.

3.  If, following the development noted 
above, the RO determines that there is a 
need for any further development 
including examination of the veteran, 
such development should be accomplished.  


Thereafter, the RO should again review the claim.  If the 
determination remains adverse to the veteran, he and his 
representative should be furnished with an appropriate 
supplemental statement of the case and afforded the 
opportunity to respond.  The case should then be returned to 
the Board, if in order.  The Board intimates no opinion as to 
the ultimate outcome of this case.  The veteran need take no 
action unless otherwise notified.


		
	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) 
(1995).

- 2 -