Citation Nr: 1322476	
Decision Date: 07/15/13    Archive Date: 07/24/13

DOCKET NO.  12-22 683	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Winston-Salem, North Carolina


THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to service connection for leukopenia, to include as due to exposure to ionizing radiation. 

2.  Entitlement to service connection for thrombocytopenia, to include as due to exposure to ionizing radiation. 

3.  Entitlement to service connection for thrombomegaly, to include as due to exposure to ionizing radiation. 

4.  Entitlement to service connection for pancytopenia, to include as due to exposure to ionizing radiation. 

5.  Entitlement to service connection for marrow hypoplasia, to include as due to radiation exposure. 

6.  Entitlement to service connection for leukemia, to include as due to exposure to ionizing radiation. 


REPRESENTATION

Veteran represented by:	The American Legion


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Adrian Jackson, Counsel


INTRODUCTION

The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Navy from September 1951 to September 1953.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2010 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Jackson, Mississippi, which denied service connection for the above listed disorders.  The case has since been transferred to the RO in Winston-Salem, North Carolina.

Please note this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2012).  38 U.S.C.A. § 7107(a)(2) (West 2002).

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

In his July 2012 substantive appeal, on VA Form 9, the Veteran requested a video conference hearing at the RO before a Veterans Law Judge of the Board.

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action:

(Please note, this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2012).  Expedited handling is requested.)

Schedule the Veteran for a video conference hearing.  Notify him of the date, time and location of this scheduled hearing.  Put a copy of this letter in his claims file.  If, for whatever reason, he changes his mind and elects not to have this hearing or fails to report for it on the date scheduled, then also document this in his claims file.

The Veteran 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).

These claims 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).



_________________________________________________
KELLI A. KORDICH
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).