Citation Nr: 1322177	
Decision Date: 07/11/13    Archive Date: 07/18/13

DOCKET NO.  10-38 149	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Atlanta, Georgia


THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to service connection for residuals of traumatic brain injury, including vertigo, memory loss, and blurry vision.

2.  Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for headaches.


REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by:	Georgia Department of Veterans Services


WITNESSES AT HEARING ON APPEAL

The Veteran and his wife



ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

C. Fleming, Counsel


REMAND

The Veteran had active military service from August 1977 to August 1980.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2010 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Atlanta, Georgia, that denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for residuals of traumatic brain injury, including vertigo, memory loss, and blurry vision, and granted his claim of service connection for headaches, assigning an initial noncompensable rating.

As the appeal of the Veteran's claim for an initial compensable rating for headaches emanates from his disagreement with the initial noncompensable rating assigned following the grant of service connection, the Board has characterized the claim as one for a higher initial rating in accordance with Fenderson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 119, 126 (1999).  

The Veteran and his wife testified before a Decision Review Officer at a hearing at the Atlanta RO in July 2010.  

The Board notes that on his September 2010 VA Form 9 (Appeal to Board of Veterans Appeals), the Veteran indicated that he wished to testify at an in-person hearing before a Veterans Law Judge.  See 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.703, 20.1304(a) (2012).  The case is therefore remanded to the Atlanta RO so that it may schedule a Board hearing and send notice of the hearing to the Veteran and his representative.  

In view of the foregoing, 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 Atlanta RO.  The RO must notify the Veteran and his representative of the date and time of the hearing in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 20.704(b) (2012), and give the Veteran and his representative opportunity to prepare for the hearing.  

By this remand, the Board intimates no opinion as to any final outcome warranted.  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 case 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 for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner.  See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2013).



_______________________________
MARK F. HALSEY	
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 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).