Citation Nr: 1304529	
Decision Date: 02/07/13    Archive Date: 02/19/13

DOCKET NO.  07-05 089	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Montgomery, Alabama


THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to service connection for a left knee disorder. 

2.  Entitlement to service connection for a right knee disorder. 

3.  Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral foot disorder.


REPRESENTATION

Veteran represented by:	John L. Jernigan, III, Esquire


WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL

The Veteran



ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

P. Childers, Counsel


INTRODUCTION

The Veteran had active military service from October 1979 to October 1982; and from September 26, 1983, to October 28, 1983.  He also had periods of active duty for training with the Alabama Army National Guard from November 1985 to January 2003.

This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2005 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Montgomery, Alabama.

In May 2010 the Veteran appeared at the Montgomery RO and testified by videoconference before a Veterans Law Judge sitting in Washington, D.C.  In a decision dated in July 2010, the May 2010 hearing judge dismissed the appeals for service connection for a cervical spine disorder, a left and a right shoulder disorder, a lumbar spine disorder, and a left and a right hip disorder.  The judge then remanded the issues of service connection for a left knee disorder, a right knee disorder, and a bilateral foot disorder for further development.

The May 2010 Veterans Law Judge has since retired from the Board.  In correspondence dated in December 2012, the Board advised the Veteran that the May 2010 hearing judge was no longer with the Board, and afforded the Veteran an opportunity for another Board hearing.

The remaining appeals for service connection for a left knee disorder, a right knee disorder, and a bilateral foot disorder are REMANDED to the RO.  VA will notify the appellant if further action is required.


REMAND

Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7107(c), the Veterans Law Judge who conducted the hearing must participate in any decision made on the appeal.  In May 2010, the Veteran testified before a Veterans Law Judge who has since retired.  In correspondence dated in December 2012 the Veteran was so notified and offered the opportunity for another Board hearing.  In correspondence dated in January 2013, he notified the Board that he wanted another videoconference Board hearing.  As such, the Board has no discretion and must remand this claim.

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action:

Schedule the Veteran for a new videoconference Board hearing, and provide adequate notice to the Veteran and his attorney of said in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 19.76.  

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).

These claims 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. 2012).


_________________________________________________
STEVEN D. REISS
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) (2012).