Citation Nr: 1321769	
Decision Date: 07/08/13    Archive Date: 07/18/13

DOCKET NO.  10-02 508	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Waco, Texas


THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to service connection for a back disability.

2.  Entitlement to service connection for a shoulder disability. 

3.  Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral foot disability. 

4.  Entitlement to service connection for carpal tunnel syndrome, bilateral hands.


REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by:	Texas Veterans Commission


WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL

Appellant 


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

C. Kedem, Counsel


INTRODUCTION

The appellant served on active duty for training (ACDUTRA) for 15 weeks commencing in November 1982 and from March 1983 to June 1983.  He had subsequent periods of ACDUTRA and/or inactive duty for training (INACDUTRA) as a member of the Texas National Guard until approximately May 1993. 

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on an appeal from a February 2009 rating decision by which the RO denied entitlement to the benefits sought herein.  

In July 2010, the appellant testified at a hearing before the undersigned Acting Veterans Law Judge that was held at the RO.  A complete transcript of the hearing is of record.

In April 2012, the Board remanded the issues on appeal for further development of the evidence.  

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 on his part.



REMAND

While the RO/AMC has made substantial efforts to comply with the Board's April 2012 remand, further action is required before the Board can adjudicate this case.

While the Veteran's service personnel records have been obtained, the RO must determine the precise dates of ACDUTRA and INACDUTRA.  If this is not possible, the RO must so state in a memorandum.  Indeed, in its April 2012 remand, the Board asked that the RO/AMC request the appropriate organization to specify the exact dates of annual and/or weekend training.  As this was not accomplished, corrective action is necessary.  See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998) (holding that where the remand of the Board or the United States Court of Appeal for Veterans Claims (Court) is not complied with, the Board errs as a matter of law when it fails to ensure compliance).

The Board notes that medical treatment records from the Family Practice Center in Waco have been associated with the claims file.  However, the RO has not yet reviewed that evidence or issued a supplemental statement of the case.  After all of the development requested herein is completed, a supplemental statement of the case should be issued that encompasses all of the evidence of record.

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED to RO/AMC for the following action:

1.  To the extent possible, determine the precise dates of ACDUTRA and INACDUTRA from June 1983 to May 1993.  If necessary, the RO/AMC should contact all appropriate organizations to obtain this information and should consider the Defense Finance and Accounting Service records.  In the event that this determination cannot be made, the RO should document its efforts in a memorandum and notify the appellant.    


2.  Readjudicate the claims remaining on appeal in light of all of the evidence of record.  If the benefits sought on appeal are not granted, the appellant and his representative should be provided a supplemental statement of the case and an appropriate time period for response.  The case should then be returned to the Board for further consideration, if otherwise in order.

The appellant 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 or by the 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).



______________________________________________
C.L. KRASINSKI
Acting 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).