Citation Nr: 1323701	
Decision Date: 07/25/13    Archive Date: 08/06/13

DOCKET NO.  10-25 210	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Portland, Oregon


THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to service connection for kidney cancer. 

2.  Whether new and material evidence has been presented to reopen a claim of entitlement to service connection for a back disability.

3.  Whether new and material evidence has been presented to reopen a claim of entitlement to service connection for a neck disability.

4.  Whether new and material evidence has been presented to reopen a claim of entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss.


REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by:	Oregon Department of Veterans' Affairs



ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

S. Lipstein


INTRODUCTION

The Veteran served on active duty from April 1953 to March 1955. 

This matter has come before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from April 2009 and July 2009 rating decisions of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). 

The Veteran was scheduled to testify at a hearing before a Veterans Law Judge in March 2013; however, VA received a written request to cancel his hearing in March 2013.

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 March 2013, the Veteran submitted pictures which he claims show that he was at Bulldozer Bowl.  He claims that the pictures showed soldiers carrying rifles, and that this was considered a combat zone.  In a letter dated in June 2013, the Veteran expressly stated that he did not waive his right to have the RO review the evidence in the first instance.  A remand is therefore required.  See 38 C.F.R. § 20.1304(c) (2012).

Lastly, relevant ongoing medical records should also be obtained.  38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A(c) (West 2002); see also Bell v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 611 (1992) 

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following actions:

(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.)

1.  Obtain relevant VA treatment records from the Portland, White City, and Roseburg VA Medical Centers, dated from April 2012 to the present.  

2.  After any additional development deemed necessary has been completed, the record should again be reviewed.  If the benefits sought on appeal remain denied, then the Veteran and his representative should be furnished with a supplemental statement of the case and be given the opportunity to respond thereto.  The case should then be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration, if 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 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).


_________________________________________________
K.A. BANFIELD
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).