Citation Nr: 18146087 Decision Date: 10/30/18 Archive Date: 10/30/18 DOCKET NO. 10-45 109 DATE: October 30, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to a rating more than 50 percent for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) for the period prior to June 27, 2014 is remanded. Entitlement to a total rating based on unemployability due to service-connected disabilities (TDIU) for the period prior to June 27, 2014 is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from January 1977 to April 1988 and from May 1989 to September 1991. In March 2016, the Veteran appeared at a hearing held at the Regional Office (RO) before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of that hearing is of record. In July 2016, the Board remanded the Veteran’s claim for additional development. By way of a February 2017 rating decision, the Veteran’s PTSD was increased to 100 percent disabling, effective June 27, 2014. As this resulted in a staged rating that did not consider the entire period on appeal, further discussion of this issue will be presented below. In June 2017, the Board denied the Veteran’s claim of entitlement to a TDIU for the period prior to June 27, 2014 and dismissed the issue of entitlement to a TDIU for the period after June 27, 2014 as moot. A December 2017 Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) order vacated the Board’s decision with respect to a TDIU prior to June 27, 2014, and adopted a Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMPR) for reconsideration of the Veteran’s claim as to that issue and it has been returned to the Board for further consideration. The Board acknowledges that the Veteran and his representative maintain that the issue of entitlement to a rating more than 50 percent for PTSD for the period prior to June 27, 2014 remains in appellate status as the RO’s February 2017 rating decision resulted in a staged rating that did not consider the entire period on appeal. See A.B. v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 35, 38 (1993). The Board concurs and has jurisdiction of this issue and it has since been merged with the current appeal. 1. Entitlement to a rating more than 50 percent for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) for the period prior to June 27, 2014 is remanded. As noted above, the Board has jurisdiction of the issue of entitlement to a rating more than 50 percent for PTSD for the period prior to June 27, 2014 because it remains in appellate status. A remand is required in order to provide further adjudication and as needed a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) with respect to this issue given evidence received since the last initial review. In that regard, the Board points to the February 2017 rating decision that granted a 100 percent rating for PTSD, effective June 27, 2014, which was erroneously considered a full grant of the benefits sought on appeal. A corresponding February 2017 SSOC did not address entitlement to a rating more than 50 percent for PTSD for the period prior to June 27, 2014. Therefore, it must be considered in a SSOC so that the Veteran and his representative have notice and can respond if they so desire.   2. Entitlement to a total rating based on unemployability due to service-connected disabilities (TDIU) for the period prior to June 27, 2014 is remanded. The Board is cognizant of an August 2018 brief, which included a vocational assessment from Z. Fosberg, CRC, who opined that “it is at least as likely as not the Veteran has been unable to secure and follow substantially gainful employment since 12/2001 due solely to his service-connected PTSD.” Because a decision on the remanded issue above of entitlement to a rating more than 50 percent for PTSD for the period prior to June 27, 2014 could significantly impact a decision on the issue of entitlement to a TDIU (particularly the Veteran’s combined rating and schedular impact for the potential period(s) on appeal), the issues are inextricably intertwined. A remand of the claim for entitlement to a TDIU for the period prior to June 27, 2014 is thereby required. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Review the evidence submitted since the last adjudication of these issues, especially the increased rating claim and enter an initial decision on the issues. As needed, thereafter, if the claims are not granted, provide an updated SSOC for the issues of entitlement to a rating more than 50 percent for PTSD for the period prior to June 27, 2014 and entitlement to a TDIU for the period prior to June 27, 2014. At a minimum, this review should include a discussion of the August 2018 brief and corresponding vocational report from Z. Fosberg, CRC submitted in support of the appeal, as well as the findings of the joint motion. The Veteran and his representative   should be given an appropriate time to respond before these issues, and/or any other pertinent issue is returned to the Board. MICHAEL D. LYON Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD M. Miller, Associate Counsel