Citation Nr: 21028611 Decision Date: 05/11/21 Archive Date: 05/11/21 DOCKET NO. 12-01 755 DATE: May 11, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for bilateral eye condition is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for Type II diabetes mellitus (DM II) is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for hysterectomy is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from January 1982 to February 1995 with service in the National Guard from June 1999 to May 2008. In May 2016, the Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ). A transcript of the hearing is of record. In a February 2017 decision, the Board determined that new and material evidence had been received to reopen the previously denied claim of entitlement to service connection for an eye condition. The Board remanded the claims of entitlement to service connection to DM II, hysterectomy, and eye condition for further development. In June 2018 and August 2020, the Board again remanded these claims for further development. Review of the claims record shows that following the January 2021 Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC), additional medical and relevant evidence were associated with the claims record. The Board may not consider additional evidence not previously reviewed by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ), unless a waiver of initial AOJ review is obtained from the Veteran. See 38 C.F.R. § 20.1304(c). In March 2021, a waiver solicitation letter was sent to the Veteran, noting that if no response was received within 45 days of the letter, it would be assumed that the Veteran did not wish to have the Board decide the appeal at this time and to remand the appeal to the AOJ for review. Review of the claims record does not show a response was received to show the Veteran requested a waiver of the submitted evidence. As such, the appeal is to be remanded for initial consideration by the AOJ and issuance of an updated SSOC. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.31, 19.37, 20.1304. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Readjudicate the issues on appeal. If any benefit sought on appeal remain denied, furnish the Veteran and her representative an SSOC and afford them the opportunity to respond before the file is returned to the Board for further consideration. MICHAEL LANE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board N. Keogh, Associate 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.