Citation Nr: 21010145
Decision Date: 02/24/21	Archive Date: 02/24/21

DOCKET NO. 16-13 480
DATE: February 24, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to service connection for a foot disorder, claimed as bunions, is remanded.

Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral eye disorder is remanded.

Entitlement to service connection for psoriasis is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty from November 1996 to November 1999.   

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).  In March 2018, the Veteran testified at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge.  The issues were previously before the Board in September 2018 where they were remanded for additional development.  

While the Board regrets further delay, the Veteran’s appeal must again be remanded for additional development. 

Additional VA treatment records were added to the claims file since the last Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC) as to this appeal was issued in September 2020.  VA regulations require that such evidence be submitted for consideration by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ), unless the right to consideration by the AOJ is waived.  38 C.F.R. § 19.37, 20.1305(c).  

Thus, in a December 1, 2020 correspondence, the Board asked the Veteran if she wished to waive AOJ review of the additional pertinent VA-generated evidence associated with the record.  The waiver request letter specifically notified the Veteran if she did not respond within 45 days from the date of the letter, the Board would remand the appeal to the AOJ for initial consideration of the additional evidence.  No response or waiver was received.  As such, the Board must remand the issues for AOJ review.  See 38 C.F.R. § 19.31.

The matters are therefore REMANDED for the following action:

Review the additional evidence added to the record since the September 2020 SSOC pertaining to these issues, complete any development deemed necessary in light of the new evidence, and readjudicate the claims.

 

 

Nathan Kroes

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans’ Appeals

Attorney for the Board	R. Scarduzio, Counsel

The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.