Citation Nr: 18142452 Decision Date: 10/15/18 Archive Date: 10/15/18 DOCKET NO. 14-11 017 DATE: October 15, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 30 percent for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for low back is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for double vision is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for disease of the nose is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for migraine disorders is remanded. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Marine Corps from December 1963 to December 1966, with service in Vietnam. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’Appeal (Board) on appeal from October 2009 and December 2009 rating decisions from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran presented sworn testimony at a hearing before the undersigned in March 2016. A transcript of that hearing is of record. The Board notes that in a July 2016 decision, it remanded the issue of PTSD, low back, double vision, disease of the nose, and migraines for additional development. When entitlement to a benefit cannot be established without a current VA examination or reexamination and a claimant, without good cause, fails to report for such examination or reexamination, action shall be taken in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 3.655 (b) or (c) as appropriate. 38 C.F.R. § 3.655 (b) applies to original or reopened claims or claims for increase. When a claimant fails to report for an examination scheduled in conjunction with an original compensation claim, the claim shall be rated based on the evidence of record. 38 C.F.R. §3.655. However, a Court remand confers on a claimant as a matter of law, the right to compliance with the remand orders. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). Additionally, following the submission of new evidence, the RO must issue a supplemental statement of the case addressing the Veteran’s claims. 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.9(c), 19.29. In its July 2016 remand, the Board specifically directed the RO to schedule the Veteran for the appropriate VA examinations to determine the nature, onset and etiology of his PTSD, low back, double vision, disease of the nose, and migraine conditions. In December 2016, the RO contacted the Veteran twice by phone and once by mail, but never received a response. As a result, the RO cancelled the examination request. In January 2017, the RO issued an SSOC confirming its denial of the Veteran’s claims. In August 2017, the Veteran had a PTSD exam, but to date, no SSOC was issued discussing this evidence. As a result, a remand is necessary for the RO to readjudicate this claim. Since that time, the RO has been in contact with and scheduled the Veteran for a hearing loss exam, but still made no attempt to schedule him for examinations in connection with his low back, double vision, disease of the nose, and migraine issues. As a result, the RO did not substantially comply with the Board’s remand directives. Thus, examinations must be obtained. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. at 268. As to the issue of entitlement to a TDIU, the August 2017 VA examination report shows that the Veteran’s PTSD adversely impacts his ability to work. The TDIU claim, however, must be remanded because his PTSD is inextricably intertwined with the Veteran's claim for a TDIU. See Rice v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 447 (2009). As such, remand is warranted. In remanding this matter, the Board notes that the Veteran’s failure to complete and submit a VA Form 21-8940 may result in the denial his TDIU claim. See August 2017 Rating Decision. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain all outstanding VA treatment records. 2. Ask the Veteran to identify any healthcare providers who have treated him for low back, left eye, nose/sinus, or headache disorders. Records from all identified sources (from which authorizations is obtained) should be sought. 3. Notify the Veteran that he may submit lay statements from himself and from other individuals who have first-hand knowledge, and/or were contemporaneously informed of his back, eye, nasal and headaches in and since service as well as impact of his service-connected disabilities, and in particular, his PTSD, on his ability to work. The Veteran should be provided an appropriate amount of time to submit this lay evidence. 4. Advise the Veteran of the need to complete a VA Form 21-8940 (Application for Increased Compensation Based on Unemployability) and that the failure to do so may adversely impact his TDIU claim. 5. After completing the above development, schedule the Veteran for an appropriate VA examination to determine the current nature, onset, and etiology of his low back, left eye, sinus/nose and headache disorders. The claims file should be made available and reviewed by the examiner and all necessary tests should be performed. All findings should be reported in detail. After review of the claims file, including lay statements provided by the Veteran, the examiners should state whether it is at least as likely as not that any of the Veteran’s diagnosed disorders, (1) had their clinical onset during active service or within one year after his separation from service, or (2) are otherwise related to an event, injury, or disease incurred in service, including his fractured maxillary and zygoma. In reaching his or her conclusions, the VA examiner should specifically review and consider lay statements of the Veteran concerning the activities he performed in service affecting his back, that he felt a popping in his back during training while lifting a large log or pole and that he later reinjured his back in service when he was thrown from a truck. The examiner should also consider the Veteran’s competent reports concerning the onset and recurrence of his back, left eye, sinus and headache symptoms. The examination report must include a complete rationale for all opinions expressed. If the examiner feels that a requested opinion cannot be rendered without resorting to speculation, the examiner should state why this is so. 6. Then readjudicate the remanded claims, including the PTSD and TDIU claim. Issue an SSOC as to all the remanded claims. The Veteran has a right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matters the Board 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 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. §§5109B, 7112 (2014). STEVEN D. REISS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD K.Ijitimehin, Associate Counsel