Citation Nr: 0007829 Decision Date: 03/23/00 Archive Date: 03/28/00 DOCKET NO. 97-31 631 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Providence, Rhode Island THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to service connection for residuals of a chest injury. 2. Entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). 3. Entitlement to an increased rating for fistula in ano, postoperative status, currently rated 60 percent disabling. 4. Entitlement to a total rating for compensation purposes based on individual unemployability. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD John M. Clarkson, III, Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran had active service from December 1964 to December 1970. This appeal arises from a September 1997 rating decision, which denied service connection for residuals of a chest injury and PTSD, and denied an increased rating for fistula in ano, postoperative status and a total rating for compensation purposes based on individual unemployability. The Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) notes that, although service connection has been denied for PTSD and that issue is currently on appeal, two additional, related issues have been raised: (1) entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder other than PTSD and (2) entitlement to secondary service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder. The evidence shows that the veteran appears to have exhibited symptoms of a neurosis in service. Records of postservice VA medical treatment of the veteran, dating from February 1995 to January 1997, include a January 1997 medical note indicating that the veteran was depressed over chronic poor bowel control, and a VA nurse practitioner's assessment was depression secondary to service-connected chronic fecal incontinence. Given the medical assessment that the veteran has a current neurosis other than PTSD, and the nurse practitioner's comment, the issues of entitlement to service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder other than PTSD and entitlement to secondary service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder are referred to the RO for clarification and appropriate action. REMAND On review of the claims folder, the Board notes that, in an October 1997 statement, the veteran requested a hearing before a hearing officer at the RO on the claims at issue in this appeal. In December 1997, the veteran requested postponement of the RO hearing he had previously requested. Although the veteran's representative submitted written argument in support of the veteran's claims in December 1999, it is unclear whether the veteran continues to desire a hearing before a hearing officer at the RO. Accordingly, a letter was forwarded to the veteran in January 2000, asking him to indicate whether he still desires a hearing at the RO. The letter informed the veteran that, if no response were received from him within 30 days of the date of the letter, it would be assumed that he still desires a hearing at the RO. More than 30 days have passed since the January 2000 letter to the veteran, without any response from the veteran. Therefore, the Board concludes that the veteran still desires a hearing before a hearing officer at the RO. Accordingly, this case must be REMANDED for the following action: The veteran should be scheduled for a personal hearing before a hearing officer at the RO. After the hearing before a hearing officer at the RO has been conducted, and the hearing officer has made his decision, if such decision is adverse to the veteran on one or more issues, the veteran and his representative should be provided a supplemental statement of the case, and be accorded a reasonable time to reply thereto. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board for further consideration, if in order. The purpose of this remand is to ensure due process of law. This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment by the RO. The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner. See The Veterans' Benefits Improvements Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-446, § 302, 108 Stat. 4645, 4658 (1994), 38 U.S.C.A. § 5101 (West Supp. 1999) (Historical and Statutory Notes). In addition, VBA's Adjudication Procedure Manual, M21-1, Part IV, directs the ROs to provide expeditious handling of all cases that have been remanded by the Board and the Court. See M21-1, Part IV, paras. 8.44- 8.45 and 38.02-38.03. BRUCE E. HYMAN Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 1991 & Supp. 1999), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. 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) (1999).