Citation Nr: 18156240
Decision Date: 12/07/18	Archive Date: 12/07/18

DOCKET NO. 14-26 486
DATE:	December 7, 2018
REMANDED
The issue of entitlement to service connection for a pituitary adenoma and/or acromegaly as due to in-service exposure to herbicide agents is remanded.
REASONS FOR REMAND
The Veteran served on active duty from August 1968 to June 1972, including service in the Republic of Vietnam.
This matter is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2012 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Cleveland, Ohio.  Jurisdiction of the Veteran’s claims file currently resides with the New York, New York RO.  
The Veteran requested a Board hearing in his July 2014 substantive appeal.  Accordingly, a Board hearing was scheduled for October 2014.  Although the Veteran failed to appear, his representative did submit argumentation on the date of his hearing.
Service Connection for a Pituitary Adenoma and/or Acromegaly
In connection with the Veteran’s appeal for service connection for a pituitary adenoma and/or acromegaly, the Board requested an opinion from a specialist under the employ of the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) in June 2016.  The specialist provided the requested opinion in August 2016.  
In October 2016, the Veteran submitted a medical opinion response form wherein he indicated that he was submitting additional evidence and argument.  On this form, the Veteran explicitly indicated that he did not waive RO consideration of this new evidence and requested that his case be remanded to the RO for consideration of the new materials in the first instance.  As such, remand is required.  See 38 C.F.R. § 20.1304(c).
The matter is REMANDED for the following action:
After completing any additional development deemed necessary, readjudicate the Veteran’s claim, in light of the August 2016 VHA opinion, a March 2017 opinion by Dr. Hope, and any other new evidence submitted.  If the benefit sought remains denied, provide an additional supplemental statement of the case to the Veteran and his representative and afford them an opportunity to respond.  Then, return the appeal to the Board, if in order.
 
S. C. KREMBS
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	N.S. Pettine, Associate Counsel