Citation Nr: 18146964
Decision Date: 11/05/18	Archive Date: 11/02/18

DOCKET NO. 16-26 053
DATE:	November 5, 2018
REMANDED
Entitlement to a rating in excess of 50 percent from April 24, 2012 to August 26, 2013, and in excess of 50 percent from October 1, 2013 for service-connected posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded.
Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) is remanded.
REASONS FOR REMAND
The Veteran served on active duty from January 1969 to November 1971.
Upon review of the record, the Board finds that the issues must be remanded.  The Board sincerely regrets the additional delay caused by this remand, but wishes to assure the Veteran that it is necessary for a full and fair adjudication of his claims.
1. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 50 percent from April 24, 2012 to August 26, 2013, and in excess of 50 percent from October 1, 2013 for service-PTSD is remanded.
The Board finds that a new examination is warranted for the Veteran’s increased rating claim.  Both the October 2012 and February 2014 examiners noted that the Veteran had never been diagnosed with PTSD – despite the Veteran already being service-connected for PTSD.  This inaccurate factual premise underscores the need for a new examination.  
Furthermore, both examiners suggested that the Veteran’s reporting of symptoms was inaccurate, and thus, the examiners were unable to render a diagnosis; however, the examiners also acknowledged that the Veteran may have “clinically significant and distressing” symptoms.  Although the Board has no reason to question the examiners’ methodology to test feigned PTSD symptoms, it is unclear whether the exaggeration of symptoms is, in and of itself, a symptom of the Veteran’s psychiatric condition.  
Accordingly, the Board finds a remand is warranted for further evidentiary development.  See Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 311 (2007) (once VA undertakes to provide a medical examination or opinion, it must ensure that the examination or opinion is adequate); see also Bowling v. Principi, 15 Vet. App. 1, 12 (2001) (emphasizing the Board’s duty to return an inadequate examination report “if further evidence or clarification of the evidence... is essential for a proper appellate decision”).
2. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) is remanded is remanded.
With regard to the TDIU claim, it is inextricably intertwined with the Veteran’s increased rating claim. The Board will defer adjudication of the TDIU claim until the development deemed necessary for the claim has been completed. See Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180, 183 (1991); Holland v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 443 (1994); Henderson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 11 (1998).
The matters are REMANDED for the following action:
1. Assist the Veteran in associating with the claims folder updated treatment records.
2. After completing the directive above, schedule an examination with the appropriate examiner to determine the current severity of the Veteran’s PTSD as well as the severity of the Veteran’s PTSD from April 24, 2012 to August 26, 2013 and from October 1, 2013.  The examination should address all symptoms and occupational and social impairment. The electronic claims file must be available to the examiner, and the examiner must specify in the examination report that these records were reviewed.
3. After any necessary development and readjudication of the increased rating claim, readjudicate the TDIU issue remaining on appeal.
 
A. S. CARACCIOLO
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	R. Gandhi, Associate Counsel