Citation Nr: 0000384 Decision Date: 01/06/00 Archive Date: 01/11/00 DOCKET NO. 98-11 071 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Columbia, South Carolina THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to secondary service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder. 2. Entitlement to an increased rating for lumbosacral strain with degenerative changes status post laminectomy, currently evaluated as 60% disabling. 3. Entitlement to an increased rating for residuals of a left foot injury with ulceration of the plantar surface of the first metatarsal bone, and post-operative residuals of excision of an ulcer with a left plantar flap, currently evaluated as 20% disabling. 4. Entitlement to an increased rating for left hip degenerative joint disease, currently evaluated as 10% disabling. 5. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities (T/R). REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans WITNESSES AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant and a friend ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Thomas A. Pluta, Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran had active service from September 1985 to June 1987. This appeal originally arose from a September 1997 rating action which increased the rating of the veteran's left foot disorder from 0% to 10%. By rating action of February 1998, the RO increased the rating of the veteran's left foot disorder from 10% to 20%; the matter of a rating in excess of 20% remains for appellate consideration. This appeal also arises from March 1998 rating actions which denied a T/R, and a July 1998 rating action which denied secondary service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, and increased ratings for low back and left hip disorders. In November 1998, the veteran and a friend gave testimony at a hearing before a hearing officer at the RO. REMAND In his December 1997 Substantive Appeal (SA) with respect to the issue of an increased rating for a left foot disorder, and in his June 1998 SA with respect to the T/R issue, the veteran requested a hearing before a Member of the Board of Veterans Appeals (Board) at the RO. In his August 1998 SA with respect to the psychiatric secondary service connection issue and the low back and left hip increased rating issues, the veteran requested both a hearing before a Member of the Board at the RO, as well as a hearing before a hearing officer at the RO. In November 1998, the veteran and a friend gave testimony at a hearing before a hearing officer at the RO. By letter of November 1999, the Board requested the veteran to clarify whether he wanted a hearing before a Member of the Board at the RO or in Washington, D.C., or whether he no longer wanted a hearing. The veteran responded in December 1999 that he wanted a hearing before a Member of the Board at the RO. Under the circumstances, this case is REMANDED to the RO for the following action: The RO should schedule, at the first convenient opportunity, a hearing for the veteran and any witnesses before a Member of the Board traveling to the RO for the purpose of conducting such hearings. After the hearing has been held, the case should be returned directly to the Board for further appellate consideration. No further action on the part of the RO is required with respect to the issues on appeal. The RO need not readjudicate the claims, and a Supplemental Statement of the Case need not be issued. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matters the Board has remanded to the RO. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment by the RO. The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board or the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) 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 is appealable to the Court. 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).