Citation Nr: 1318291	
Decision Date: 06/05/13    Archive Date: 06/11/13

DOCKET NO.  05-39 613	)	DATE
	)
	)

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


THE ISSUE

Entitlement to service connection for hepatitis.


REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by:	The American Legion


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Joseph R. Keselyak, Counsel



INTRODUCTION

The Veteran served on active duty from March 1977 to August 1985.

This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a January 2005 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Montgomery, Alabama. 

In December 2012, the Board referred the case to the Veterans Health Administration ("VHA") for a medical opinion from a hepatologist with experience in infectious disease concerning the etiology of the Veteran's claimed hepatitis.  In March 2013, the opinion was received and associated with the claims folder; the appellant and his representative were subsequently furnished a copy of the opinion and advised that the appellant had 60 days to submit relevant evidence or argument in response.  See 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.901, 20.903 (2012).  In April 2013, the appellant submitted further written argument and evidence in support of the claim.

Please note this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2012).  38 U.S.C.A. § 7107(a)(2) (West 2002).

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

As noted above, following the procurement of the March 2013 VHA opinion, the Veteran submitted argument and evidence in the form of medical records pertaining to hepatitis.  In an April 2013 communication, he also specifically declined to waive initial RO consideration of the newly submitted evidence.  See 38 C.F.R. 
§ 20.1304(c).  As such this evidence must be returned for initial RO consideration, and if the benefits sought remain denied, for issuance of a Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC).  See 38 C.F.R. § 19.31 (2012).

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action:

(Please note, this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2012).  Expedited handling is requested.)

After completion of any other indicated development, readjudicate the Veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for hepatitis, including considering all additional evidence submitted or otherwise obtained since the latest SSOC. If the benefits sought on appeal continue to be denied, send him and his representative another SSOC and give them an opportunity to submit additional evidence and/or argument in response thereto before returning the file to the Board for further appellate consideration of this claim.

The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter the Board has remanded.  Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999).
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).



_________________________________________________
BETHANY L. BUCK
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).