Citation Nr: 18147947
Decision Date: 11/06/18	Archive Date: 11/06/18

DOCKET NO. 08-38 261
DATE:	November 6, 2018
REMANDED
The issue of entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) prior to November 2011 is remanded. 
REASONS FOR REMAND
The Veteran served on active duty from November 1965 to November 1967.
This matter is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2006 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Houston, Texas.  The Veteran appealed the decision to the Board in October 2008.  He then testified at a Travel Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in May 2013.  A transcript of the hearing is associated with the claims file.  
The Board denied the claim on appeal in an April 2014 decision, which the Veteran appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court).  In a December 2014 Order, the Court remanded the claim pursuant to a December 2014 Joint Motion for Remand.  In February 2015, the Board remanded the issue for additional development.  The case is again before the Board for appellate consideration.
The issue of entitlement to a TDIU prior to November 2011 is remanded.
The sole question before the Board is whether a TDIU was warranted at any time between August 2004 and November 2011.  In the February 2015 remand, the Board requested medical inquiry and commentary on this issue.  In response, the Veteran underwent several VA examinations for which several VA reports are of record.  These reports address the nature and severity of several service-connected disabilities.  But none of the reports addresses the Board’s February 2015 inquiry – i.e., none addresses the nature and severity of the service-connected disability between August 2004 and November 2011.  A remand is therefore warranted for a new VA examination and report.  See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998).
The matter is REMANDED for the following action:
Obtain a social and industrial survey to assess impairment caused by service-connected disability between August 2004 and November 2011.  The report should comment on whether, during this period, such disability impacted the Veteran’s ability to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation.  A personal examination of the Veteran is not necessary.  The examination report should be based on a review of the claims file.  
From August 2004, the Veteran has been service connected for anxiety disorder and diabetes mellitus type II (diabetes).  
From December 2005, the Veteran has been service connected for bilateral lower extremity peripheral neuropathy. 
From January 2008, the Veteran has been service connected for bilateral upper extremity peripheral neuropathy, eye disability, kidney disability, erectile dysfunction, and bilateral lower extremity peripheral arterial and vascular disease.   
In assessing the nature and severity of service-connected disability between August 2004 and November 2011, consider and discuss VA reports dated in 2017 which indicate that the Veteran does not have diabetes, and that previous diagnoses of record are based on erroneous reports of medical history.    
Also consider and discuss – regarding the relevant period between August 2004 and November 2011 – the Veteran’s level of education, special training, and prior work experience, but not his age or any impairment caused by nonservice-connected disabilities.
Please support any opinion with a detailed explanation.  

 
C. TRUEBA
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	Christopher McEntee, Counsel