Citation Nr: 1323094 Decision Date: 07/19/13 Archive Date: 07/24/13 DOCKET NO. 10-48 833 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Jackson, Mississippi THE ISSUE Entitlement to a disability ratings for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in excess of 30 percent prior to April 14, 2012, and in excess of 50 percent thereafter. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Diane M. Donahue, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from June 1974 to June 1978. This case comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2009 rating decision by the Jackson, Mississippi, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). By the way of an August 2012 rating decision, the RO increased the assigned evaluation for PTSD to 50 percent disabling, effective from April 145, 2012, the date of a VA mental health examination. The increased rating claim remains in controversy as the rating remains less than the maximum available schedular benefit awardable. See AB v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 35, 38 (1993). In February 2010, the Veteran appointed the Disabled American Veterans (DAV) as his accredited representative in this case. More recently, correspondence has been received from a private attorney asserting that he is now representing the Veteran in this appeal. However, neither the claims file nor Virtual VA contain a VA Form 21-22a appointing that private attorney as the Veteran's representative. Therefore, the Board has continued to list DAV as his representative on the title page. As will be discussed below, this case is being remanded to afford the Veteran the opportunity to testify at a personal hearing. Pursuant to the Board's remand instructions, the Veteran will be given the opportunity to clarify representation prior to his hearing. The Board also notes that DAV was not given the opportunity to prepare an Informal Hearing Presentation, which was likely the result of administrative confusion over who the appropriate representative is in this appeal. However, as the Veteran is being given the opportunity to clarify his representative, and such representative will be afforded the opportunity to present evidence and argument at a personal hearing, the Board finds no prejudice in proceeding with a remand at this time. As noted, 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 a December 2009 VA Form 9, the Veteran requested a Central Office Board hearing. In a March 2011 statement, the Veteran withdrew his request for a Central Office hearing. In an October 2012 letter, the Veteran indicated that he now requests a videoconference Board hearing. Pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.700 (2012), a hearing on appeal will be granted to an appellant who requests a hearing and is willing to appear in person. See also 38 U.S.C.A. § 7107 (West 2002) (pertaining specifically to hearings before the Board). In accordance with the Veteran's request, the Board finds that the Veteran should be scheduled for a videoconference hearing before a member of the Board. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Contact the Veteran and request that he clarify who he wishes to represent him in this appeal. Provide him with appropriate documentation so as to allow him to select a service organization, agent, or private attorney. 2. Once the issue of representation has been clarified, schedule the appellant for the next available videoconference hearing date. The Veteran should be notified of the date, time and place of that hearing by letter mailed to his current address of record, with a copy to his representative. 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). _________________________________________________ MICHAEL LANE 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).