Citation Nr: 1323554	
Decision Date: 07/24/13    Archive Date: 08/01/13

DOCKET NO.  13-03 055	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Roanoke, Virginia


THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to service connection for post-operative residuals of inguinal hernia repair to include scarring. 

2.  Entitlement to service connection for Hepatitis C. 

3.  Entitlement to service connection for residuals of frostbite to the face and gums. 

4.  Entitlement to service connection for a dental disorder. 

5.  Entitlement to service connection for a gastrointestinal disorder claimed as acid reflux. 

6.  Entitlement to service connection for intestinal polyps. 


REPRESENTATION

Veteran represented by:	Veterans of Foreign Wars


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Adrian Jackson, Counsel


INTRODUCTION

The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from December 1970 to December 1973.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2010 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Roanoke, Virginia, which denied service connection for the above listed disorders.  

In June 2008, the Veteran, in pertinent part, referred to claims of service connection for right shoulder and bilateral knee disabilities.  In May and December 2010, the Veteran also indicated that he had been underpaid for ongoing VA benefits.  As the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ), the RO must consider these claims in the first instance.  Therefore, the Board does not have jurisdiction over these claims.  They are referred to the RO for appropriate development and consideration.  See Godfrey v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 398 (1995) (the Board generally does not have jurisdiction over an issue not yet adjudicated by the RO).

The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC.  VA will notify the Veteran if further action is required.



REMAND

In his January 2013 substantive appeal, on VA Form 9, the Veteran requested a hearing at the RO before a Veterans Law Judge of the Board.  According to a June 2013 Report of General Information, VA Form 27-0820, the Veteran agreed to a video conference hearing.

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).