Citation Nr: 1325884	
Decision Date: 08/15/13    Archive Date: 08/26/13

DOCKET NO.  11-21 532	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Providence, Rhode Island


THE ISSUE

Entitlement to a dependency allowance for a spouse.


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

James R. Siegel, Counsel


INTRODUCTION

The Veteran served on active duty from July 2002 to September 2005.

By letter dated August 2010, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) informed the appellant that he was not entitled to a dependency allowance for a spouse.  The Veteran filed a timely appeal to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board).


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 substantive appeal received in August 2011, the Veteran indicated he wanted to testify before a Veterans Law Judge at a videoconference hearing at the local RO.  

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action:

Schedule the appellant for a videoconference hearing before a Veterans Law Judge of the Board, in accordance with applicable provisions.  The appellant should be notified of the time and place to report.

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).




_________________________________________________
ALAN S. PEEVY
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).