Citation Nr: 1322938 Decision Date: 07/18/13 Archive Date: 07/24/13 DOCKET NO. 11-31 263 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Winston-Salem, North Carolina THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 50 percent prior to December 13, 2011, and in excess of 70 percent from December 13, 2011 for bipolar disorder. 2. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to the service-connected bipolar disability (TDIU). REPRESENTATION Veteran represented by: The American Legion ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD S. Finn, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from October 1970 to June 1971, during the Vietnam Era. This appeal to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) is from a September 2010 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. As the claim before the Board involves a request for higher initial rating following the grant of service connection, the Board has characterized the issue in light of the distinction noted in Fenderson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 119, 126 (1999) (distinguishing initial rating claims from claims for increased ratings for disabilities already service-connected). In December 2012, the Veteran filed a formal claim for TDIU as part of the pending higher initial rating claim for bipolar disorder. The issue has been rephrased on the title page accordingly. Rice v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 447 (2009). In a January 2012 Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC), the RO granted an initial 70 percent rating for bipolar disorder, effective December 13, 2011 and denied TDIU. A review of the Virtual VA paperless claims processing system does not reveal any additional documents pertinent to the present appeal. Please note this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2012). 38 U.S.C.A. § 7107(a)(2) (West 2002). The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the Veteran if further action is required. REMAND The Veteran received treatment for bipolar disorder at Texas Rehabilitation Center, his private psychiatrist Dr. Dueter (at least since April 2005), Dr. Hopkins at MHOS, and three prior psychiatric admissions at non-VA facilities. (See February 2006 and July 2006 VA treatment records). After any necessary clarification from the Veteran regarding date, time, and location of treatment, these records should be associated with the claims file. An additional VA medical opinion is also required, as set forth below, and complete VA treatment records should be obtained. See Bell v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 611 (1992). The issue of TDIU is inextricably intertwined with the Veteran's claim for an increased rating for his bipolar disorder. See Tyrues v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 166, 178 (2009) (if matter on appeal is inextricably intertwined with an issue or claim still pending before VA, for reasons of judicial economy or on prudential grounds, review of merits of the claim or issue adjudicated will generally be deferred for further adjudication, as appropriate, with the other "inextricably intertwined" matters still being adjudicated below). Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: (Please note, this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2012). Expedited handling is requested.) 1. Make arrangements to obtain a complete copy of the Veteran's treatment records from the Texas Rehabilitation Center, his private psychiatrist Dr. Dueter, Dr. Hopkins at MHOS, and three prior psychiatric admission at non-VA facilities. 2. Make arrangements to obtain the Veteran's complete treatment records from Fayetteville, San Antonio, South Texas Healthcare System VA Medical Centers, dated since January 2010. 3. After completion of the above, afford the Veteran a VA psychiatric medical examination to determine the severity of his bipolar disorder and whether his service-connected bipolar disorder renders him unemployable. In making this determination the examiner must explicitly limit his/her inquiry to the effect that the Veteran's service-connected disability has on his employability and must not consider the effect of nonservice-connected disabilities. The Veteran's claims folder should be made available to the examiner. Any necessary testing should be performed. A specific explanation for the opinion given should be provided. 4. Finally, readjudicate the claims in light of the additional evidence obtained. If the benefits sought are not granted to the Veteran's satisfaction, send him and his representative a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) and give them time to respond to it before returning the case to the Board for further appellate consideration. The Veteran 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). _________________________________________________ KELLI A. KORDICH Acting 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).