Citation Nr: 1318405	
Decision Date: 06/06/13    Archive Date: 06/11/13

DOCKET NO.  09-36 190	)	DATE
	
	)
On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Nashville, Tennessee


THE ISSUES

1.  Whether new and material evidence has been presented to reopen the claim of service connection for a left knee disability. 

2.  Whether new and material evidence has been presented to reopen the claim of service connection for tinea versicolor.
 
3.  Whether new and material evidence has been presented to reopen the claim of service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder.

4.  Entitlement to service connection for headaches. 
 
5.  Entitlement to service connection for sleep impairment. 

6.  Entitlement to service connection for abnormal weight. 
 
7.  Entitlement to service connection for fatigue. 

8.  Entitlement to service connection for fingernail discoloration. 




9.  Entitlement to service connection for a psychiatric disorder other than posttraumatic stress disorder.

10.  Entitlement to a compensable rating for pseudofolliculitis barbae.

11.  Entitlement to a compensable rating for residuals of a right fibula fracture.

12.  Entitlement to a 10 percent disability evaluation for multiple nonservice-connected disabilities.
 
REPRESENTATION

Veteran represented by:	Disabled American Veterans


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

S. Coyle, Counsel


INTRODUCTION

The Veteran served on active duty from June 1990 to August 2000 and from August 2002 to July 2003.  He also served in the Tennessee and Texas Army National Guard from July 2001 to September 2003.     

This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal of a rating decision in October 2008 of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).







The claims of service connection for headaches, sleep impairment, abnormal weight loss, fatigue, and fingernail discoloration, were previously denied by the RO in a rating decision in February 2006.  In the rating decision in October 2008, now on appeal, the RO reopened the claims and denied the claims of the merits. 

The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center in Washington, DC.  



REMAND

In July 2011, the Veteran did not appear for a scheduled hearing before the Board.  The record shows that the notice of the hearing was sent to an incorrect address.  In March 2013, the Veteran renewed his request for a hearing before the Board.  As good cause is shown for the Veteran's failure to appear for the scheduled hearing, the motion for a new hearing is granted.  38 C.F.R. § 20.704(d).

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action:

Schedule the Veteran for an in-person hearing before the Board at the Nashville, Tennessee, RO.  

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).









The claims must be afforded expeditious treatment.  The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) 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).



_________________________________________________
George E. Guido Jr.
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 Court.  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).