Citation Nr: 1319857	
Decision Date: 06/20/13    Archive Date: 07/02/13

DOCKET NO.  09-42 211A	)	DATE
	)
	)

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


THE ISSUE

Whether new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen a previously denied claim of entitlement to service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).


REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by:	Disabled American Veterans


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

M. H. Stubbs, Counsel



INTRODUCTION

The Veteran served on active duty from July 1970 to July 1974.

These matters come before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2007 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Los Angeles, California.

Here, the Veteran filed a notice of disagreement with the June 2007 rating decision in December 2007.  A statement of the case was mailed to the Veteran on August 31, 2009.  The Veteran's substantive appeal, VA Form 9, was received November 3, 2009.  An appellant must submit a substantive appeal within one year of the date of mailing of the notice of the result of initial review or determination (June 2007) or within 60 days from the date of the statement of the case is mailed.  Here, the Veteran's substantive appeal was not received prior to the 60-day deadline, but the envelope is of record, and shows that the letter was post-marked October 30, 2009, just within the deadline.  Therefore, the Veteran's substantive appeal is timely.

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

The Board notes that the Veteran requested a Board hearing on his October 2009 substantive appeal.  In contrast, the Veteran submitted a March 2010 substantive appeal indicating he did not want a Board hearing.  (It appears the Veteran submitted the second substantive appeal due to the conflict regarding whether he had submitted a timely appeal).  

In lieu of a VA Form 646, the Veteran's representative submitted a February 2012 Appeal Pre-Certification Review clarify that a Travel Board hearing was requested that that the date of the hearing was "TBD."  

In light of this request, a remand is necessary to schedule a hearing before a traveling Member of the Board.

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action:

The RO should schedule the Veteran for a hearing before a Member of the Board sitting at the RO in accordance with applicable law.

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).



_________________________________________________
DAVID L. WIGHT
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).