Citation Nr: 1304032	
Decision Date: 02/05/13    Archive Date: 02/08/13

DOCKET NO.  11-32 370	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Salt Lake City, Utah


THE ISSUE

Entitlement to an initial increased rating in excess of 50 percent for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

M. Young, Counsel


INTRODUCTION

The Veteran served on active duty from May 1966 to May 1968.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2011 rating decision by a Regional Office (RO) of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).  In that rating decision, the RO granted service connection for PTSD and assigned a 50 percent disability rating effective October 23, 2009, and denied service connection for left ear hearing loss and tinnitus.  The Veteran filed a notice of disagreement only as to the rating assigned for PTSD.  A statement of the case (SOC) was issued in September 2011, and a substantive appeal was received in December 2011.  The matters of entitlement to service connection for left ear hearing loss and tinnitus are not in appellate status at this time.  The Board notes that in correspondence received in December 2011, the Veteran withdrew representation by the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States.  He is proceeding with his appeal as an unrepresented appellant.  

The Board observes that attached to the additional evidence received from the RO is a VA Form-9 (Substantive Appeal) with the inscription "SEE ATTACHED LETTERS" and signed by the Veteran.  The attached letters refer to the additional evidence described above, which were submitted in support the Veteran's claim for an increased rating for his service-connected PTSD.  However, it appears the RO may have construed the VA Form-9, submitted by the Veteran, as a timely filed notice of disagreement to a March 2012 decision review officer's decision that denied the Veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for high blood pressure.  The RO stamped this document as a notice of disagreement.  However, as the Board does not construe such as a notice of disagreement for the hypertension claim, remand to the RO for a statement of the case is not necessary.  

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

In May 2012 the Board received additional evidence, including a medical opinion letter from a social worker at the Salt Lake City VA Medical Center, and written statements from the Veteran's wife and daughter.  While this additional evidence was forwarded to the Board from the RO, it was not considered in a decision by the RO.  In December 2012 the Board notified the Veteran of his right to have the RO review the additional evidence prior to the Board's review of the evidence or he could waive the right by submitting a waiver in writing.  In correspondence dated in December 2012 the Veteran requested that his case be sent back to the RO for review of the additional evidence.

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action:

The RO should review the evidence associated with the claims file since the March 2012 supplemental SOC and readjudicate the claim.  If the benefit sought is not fully granted the Veteran should be furnished a supplemental SOC and be given the opportunity to respond.  The case should then be returned to the Board.  

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 for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner.  See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2012).



_________________________________________________
ALAN S. PEEVY
Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals

Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board 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) (2012).