Citation Nr: 0005496 Decision Date: 02/29/00 Archive Date: 03/07/00 DOCKET NO. 98-19 428A ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Oakland, California THE ISSUES 1. Whether a June 1970 VA Regional Office rating decision which assigned a 30 percent disability rating for the veteran's service-connected left leg gunshot wound residuals was clearly and unmistakably erroneous. 2. Entitlement to an effective date earlier than June 19, 1990 for the grant of a 50 percent disability rating for service-connected post-traumatic stress disorder. 3. Entitlement to an effective date earlier than June 19, 1990 for the grant of a 40 percent disability rating for service-connected traumatic arthritis of the lumbar spine. 4. Entitlement to an effective date earlier than December 15, 1982 for the grant of special monthly compensation for loss of use of the left foot. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD M.S. Lane, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from August 1967 to May 1970. His decorations include the Purple Heart Medal. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from rating decisions by the Oakland, California Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). REMAND In a Substantive Appeal (VA Form 9) submitted in December 1998, the veteran requested a personal hearing before a member of the Board at the RO. The veteran reiterated this request in a signed statement submitted in March 1999. The veteran further indicated that he was willing to appear before a Board teleconference hearing. See 38 C.F.R. § 20.700(e) (1999). A teleconference hearing was scheduled for June 9, 1999. The veteran was notified of the date and time of his hearing in a May 1999 letter from the RO. The veteran failed to appear for his hearing. In August 1999, the Board issued a letter to the veteran requesting that he clarify whether he still desired a personal hearing before a member of the Board. The veteran was advised that if he failed to respond within 30 days, it would be assumed that he still desired such a hearing and one would be scheduled. Shortly thereafter, the veteran's accredited representative submitted a signed statement requesting that the veteran be scheduled for another Board teleconferencing hearing. Pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.700 (1999), a hearing on appeal will be granted if an appellant, or an appellant's representative acting on his or her behalf, expresses a desire to appear in person. The Board shall decide an appeal only after affording the appellant an opportunity for a hearing. See 38 U.S.C.A. § 7107(b) (West 1991 & Supp 1999). Because the Board may not proceed with an adjudication of the veteran's claim without affording him an opportunity for the hearing he requested, a remand is required. The Board notes that in January 2000, the veteran submitted a motion for a new hearing. Because the Board has already determined that an additional opportunity for a hearing is warranted, the Board finds that the veteran's motion has been rendered moot and need not be addressed. Accordingly, this case is remanded for the following: The RO should take steps to schedule the veteran for a hearing, by means of video teleconferencing, before a member of the Board. Appropriate notification should be given to the veteran and his representative, and such notification should be documented and associated with the veteran's claims folder. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded to the regional office. 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 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. Barry F. Bohan 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).