Citation Nr: 0007185 Decision Date: 03/16/00 Archive Date: 09/08/00 DOCKET NO. 98-08 766A DATE MAR 16, 2000 On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Buffalo, New York THE ISSUE Entitlement to an effective date earlier than January 22, 1992, for the grant of service connection for post traumatic stress disorder. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: To be clarified ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Clifford R. Olson, Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from April 1969 to September 1970. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board or BVA) on appeal from a decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Buffalo, New York. REMAND A review of the record reflects that the veteran appointed the Disabled American Veterans as his representative in April 1992 (see VA Form 21-22). In March 1996 he retained Robert J. Maranto, Jr., attorney-at-law, as his representative. In February 1999, Mr. Maranto informed the RO that he no longer represented the veteran. In April 1999 correspondence was received from the Disabled American Veterans. In view of these facts, the Board is of the opinion that additional development is required In order to ensure the veteran's right of due process, the case is Remanded for the following: 1. The RO should request the veteran to clarify whether he is being represented in his current appeal. The RO should @sh the veteran the appropriate form regarding the appointment of a service organization as his representative. The RO should offer the veteran any assistance he might need regarding this matter. He should also be informed that he has the opportunity to submit additional evidence and arguments in support of his claim. 2. Thereafter, the RO should ensure that the representative, if appointed by the veteran, has had the opportunity to review the veteran's claims folder and make a presentation on behalf of the veteran in conjunction with his current claim. - 2 - Thereafter, the case should be reviewed by the RO. If the benefit sought is not granted, all appropriate procedural actions should be followed. The case should then be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration. The purpose of this Remand is to ensure the veterans right of due process and the Board implies no conclusion, either legal or factual by this action. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the p 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, 465 8 (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. ROBERT P. REGAN 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). 3 -