Citation Nr: 1104586 Decision Date: 02/04/11 Archive Date: 02/14/11 DOCKET NO. 09-11 337A ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St. Petersburg, Florida THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to an initial rating greater than 70 percent for service-connected schizoaffective disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). 2. Entitlement to an effective date earlier than May 10, 2006 for the award of service connection for schizoaffective disorder (now evaluated with PTSD). REPRESENTATION Veteran represented by: Florida Department of Veterans Affairs ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD V. Chiappetta, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from August 2002 to March 2003, and from December 2003 to February 2005. This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (the Board) on appeal of a June 2008 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in St. Petersburg, Florida. In that decision, the RO awarded the Veteran service- connection for schizoaffective disorder, and assigned a 50 percent disability rating effective May 10, 2006. The Veteran disagreed with this initial rating and assigned effective date, and perfected an appeal as to both issues. During the pendency of the appeal, the RO awarded the Veteran service connection for PTSD. See the RO's March 2009 rating decision. Because all mental disorders are rated under the same criteria in the rating schedule, the RO included consideration of the Veteran's PTSD symptomatology with its overall evaluation of the Veteran's other service-connected mental health disability, schizoaffective disorder, and increased the Veteran's disability rating from 50 to 70 percent, effective the original date of service connection, May 10, 2006. The Veteran has not expressed satisfaction with the 70 percent rating, and has made clear his desire to proceed with his appeal. See AB v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 35, 38 (1993) [when a veteran is not granted the maximum benefit allowable under the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities, the pending appeal as to that issue is not abrogated]. As explained in further detail below, the Veteran was scheduled for a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in October 2010 at the RO. On the day of the hearing, the Veteran's mother contacted the RO and requested that this hearing be rescheduled. The Board has construed this communication as a motion to reschedule the Board hearing. The Board finds that good cause is shown to have the hearing rescheduled. Thus, a Remand is necessary to schedule him for a new Travel Board hearing at the RO. The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. REMAND The Veteran is seeking entitlement to an initial rating greater than 70 percent for his service-connected schizoaffective disorder and PTSD. Additionally, the Veteran seeks an effective date earlier than May 10, 2006 for the award of service- connection for his mental disabilities. The Veteran has a right to request a hearing before the issuance of a Board decision. Bernard v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 384, 393 (1993) (citing 38 U.S.C.A. § 7104(a) (West 1991)); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.103(a) and (c), 19.9, 19.25, 20.704 (2009). When a hearing is scheduled and the Veteran fails to appear, no further request for a hearing will be granted unless good cause is shown or a motion to reschedule is received within 15 days. 38 C.F.R. § 20.702(d). Such motion to reschedule must include the reason or reasons the Veteran could not attend the originally scheduled hearing and the reason a timely request for a postponement for the hearing was not submitted. On his substantive appeal [VA Form 9], the Veteran specifically requested a Travel Board hearing at his local VA office before a member of the BVA. Such was scheduled for October 25, 2010 at the RO. On this date, the Veteran's mother contacted the RO and requested that this hearing be rescheduled, indicating that the Veteran was "picked up for an outstanding warrant" while he was travelling to the RO area the day before. The Board finds that the Veteran has submitted good cause to have his hearing rescheduled. Notably, the Veteran was making efforts to attend the scheduled hearing when he was detained by law enforcement. A hearing before a Veterans Law Judge travelling to the RO must be scheduled at the RO level, and, accordingly, a remand is required. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: VBA should schedule the Veteran for a BVA Travel Board hearing at the RO in St. Petersburg, Florida. The Veteran should be notified of the date, time and place of such a hearing by letter mailed to his current address of record. The Veteran has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the 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. 2010). _________________________________________________ DAVID L. WIGHT 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) (2010).