Citation Nr: 1630385	
Decision Date: 07/29/16    Archive Date: 08/04/16

DOCKET NO.  13-21 941	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St. Petersburg, Florida


THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral eye condition.

2.  Entitlement to service connection for a tumor on the uterus.

3.  Whether new and material evidence has been received to reopen a claim of entitlement to service connection for pes planus.


REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by:	Attorney Kenneth LaVan


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

C. Howell, Associate Counsel


INTRODUCTION

The Veteran served on active duty for training from June 1980 to December 1980.  

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in St. Petersburg, Florida.  In preparing to decide the issue on appeal, the Board has reviewed the contents of the Veteran's electronic Virtual VA and Veterans Benefit Management System (VBMS) claims files.  All records are now in these electronic systems.  

The appeal is REMANDED to the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ).  VA will notify the appellant if further action is required.


REMAND

A remand is required to provide the Veteran a videoconference hearing.  In her June 2013 substantive appeal, she requested a live videoconference hearing.  A June 2016 VA letter indicates that a videoconference hearing was originally scheduled in July 2016.  However, a June 2016 letter from the Veteran's representative requested that the videoconference hearing be rescheduled for a later date.  Where a Board hearing is requested, the Board may decide an appeal only after affording the Veteran an opportunity for a hearing.  38 U.S.C.A. § 7107(b), (d) (West 2014); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.103(c), 20.700(a) (2015).  On remand, the Veteran must be provided a videoconference hearing.

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action:

Schedule the Veteran for a videoconference hearing at the appropriate RO at the next available opportunity in accordance with applicable procedures.  If the Veteran wishes to withdraw her hearing request, she should do so in writing at the RO.  The case should then be returned to the Board, if in order.

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 2014).



_________________________________________________
DAVID L. WIGHT
Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals

Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2014), 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) (2015).