Citation Nr: 1305597	
Decision Date: 02/15/13    Archive Date: 02/21/13

DOCKET NO.  11-14 133	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Oakland, California


THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss.

2.  Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus.


REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by:	California Department of Veterans Affairs


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

T. M. Gillett, Counsel



INTRODUCTION

The Veteran served on active duty from March 1948 to February 1952.  

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2010 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Oakland, California.

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 a May 2011 Substantive Appeal to the Board, the Veteran requested a hearing before a Veterans Law Judge of the Board to be held via live videoconference (videoconference hearing).  Within 90 days of the December 2012 certification of the appeal to the Board, the Veteran subsequently submitted a January 2013 statement directly to the Board, requesting that he be allowed to attend a hearing before a Veterans Law Judge, seated at the RO (Travel Board hearing), instead of the scheduled videoconference hearing.  38 C.F.R. §§ 20.703, 20.1304 (2012).

Therefore, a remand is necessary to schedule a Travel Board hearing, allowing the Veteran to appear at the RO before a Veterans Law Judge. 

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action:

The RO should schedule a Travel Board hearing for the Veteran to attend at the RO before a member of the Board.  The RO should notify the Veteran and his representative of the date and time of the hearing in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 20.704(b) (2012), and give the Veteran and his representative opportunity to prepare for the hearing. 

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. 2012).



_________________________________________________
P.M. DILORENZO
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).