Citation Nr: 1318654	
Decision Date: 06/07/13    Archive Date: 06/11/13

DOCKET NO.  04-07 278	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Waco, Texas


THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to service connection for hypertension, to include as secondary to diabetes mellitus.

2.  Entitlement to service connection for coronary artery disease, status post coronary artery bypass graft, to include as secondary to diabetes mellitus.

3.  Entitlement to service connection for type II diabetes mellitus as a result of herbicide exposure.


REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by:	Katrina J. Eagle, Attorney at Law


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

A. Barone, Counsel


INTRODUCTION

The Veteran had active duty service from January 1963 to May 1966.

This case is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2003 rating decision by a Regional Office (RO) of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).  This matter has been previously before the Board on multiple occasions.  In June 2009, the Board denied the claims on appeal.  The Veteran appealed the Board's June 2009 decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (hereinafter 'the Court').  In an April 2011 memorandum decision, the Court vacated the Board's June 2009 decision to the extent of the three issues identified above.  (The Court noted that the Veteran withdrew his claims as to the other two issues denied in the Board's June 2009 decision.)  The Court remanded the matter to the Board for further adjudication.  In September 2011, the Board remanded these issues for additional development in accordance with the April 2011 Court memorandum decision.

The appeal is REMANDED to the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office.  VA will notify the appellant if further action is required.


REMAND

In a letter received at the Board in February 2013, the appellant's representative requested a Travel Board hearing to be conducted at his local RO.  No previous Board hearing has been arranged for the Veteran in connection with these issues on appeal.  A Travel Board conference hearing must now be scheduled.  See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.103(c)(1); 20.700(a) (2012).  The Veteran and his representative are to be notified by letter of the date, time, and place of that hearing.

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action:

The RO should schedule the Veteran for a Travel Board hearing at the RO, in connection with his appeal.  After the hearing is conducted, or in the event the Veteran withdraws his hearing request or fails to report for a scheduled hearing, the case should 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 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).



_________________________________________________
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 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).