Citation Nr: 0809918 Decision Date: 03/25/08 Archive Date: 04/09/08 DOCKET NO. 05-24 469A ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Atlanta, Georgia THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for a right foot and ankle disability, to include Achilles tendonitis. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Georgia Department of Veterans Services WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL Veteran ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Kristi L. Gunn, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from July 1944 to June 1946 and from October 1950 to November 1951. This case comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2004 rating decision of the Atlanta, Georgia, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO), which denied entitlement to right Achilles tendonitis, previously claimed as a right foot and ankle disorder. In June 2007, the veteran testified at a travel board hearing before the undersigned Acting Veterans Law Judge. A copy of the transcript is of record. A motion to advance this case on the Board's docket was received and granted by the Board in June 2007, for good cause. 38 U.S.C.A. § 7107 (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2007). In July 2007, the Board remanded the claim for additional development and adjudicative action. The case has been returned to the Board for further appellate review. The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the appellant if further action is required. REMAND Regrettably, the record as it stands is currently inadequate for the purpose of rendering a fully informed decision as to the claim of service connection for a right foot and ankle disability, to include Achilles tendonitis. Where the record before the Board is inadequate to render a fully informed decision, a remand to the RO is required in order to fulfill its statutory duty to assist the veteran to develop the facts pertinent to the claim. Ascherl v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 371, 377 (1993). In February 2004, the veteran appointed the Georgia Department of Veterans Services as his representative. See February 2004 Appointment of Veterans Service Organization as Claimant's Representative form (VA Form 21-22). Upon review of the record, it does not appear that the representative was given an opportunity to submit argument or procedural documents in support of the veteran's claim after the Appeals Management Center (AMC) had completed the remand development in the case. When an appellant appeals to the Board, he or she "will be accorded full right to representation in all stages of an appeal by a recognized organization, attorney, agent, or other authorized person." 38 C.F.R. § 20.600 (2007). When an appellant has appointed a representative, the RO must afford that representative the opportunity to execute a VA Form 646, prior to certification of the appeal to the Board "in all instances." VA Adjudication Procedure Manual, M21-1, Part IV, para. 8.29 (Mar. 24, 2000); 38 C.F.R. § 20.600 (2007). In order to comply with due process of law, the veteran's representative must be provided the opportunity to review the record and offer written argument on the veteran's behalf. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Forward the claims folder to the Georgia Department of Veterans Services and afford the organization an opportunity to review the claims folder and submit a VA Form 646 on behalf of the veteran. All efforts made should be documented and incorporated into the claims file. Notification of this action should be sent to the veteran and documented in the claims file. 2. Thereafter, the case should 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. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. 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 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2007). _________________________________________________ C. CRAWFORD Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), 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) (2007).