Citation Nr: 18155824 Decision Date: 12/06/18 Archive Date: 12/06/18 DOCKET NO. 98-19 431 DATE: December 6, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities (TDIU) is remanded. (Separate appeals to reopen service connection for sleep and seizure disabilities, seeking earlier effective dates for awards of service connection for hearing loss, tinnitus, pseudofolliculitis barbae, and headaches, seeking service connection for diabetes mellitus, sleep disability, and disability manifested by seizure-like symptoms, and seeking higher ratings for service-connected hearing loss, tinnitus, psychiatric disability, headaches, and pseudofolliculitis barbae are being adjudicated in a concurrent decision by another Veterans Law Judge) REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from October 1984 to October 1988. This matter is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a September 2003 rating decision. The Board acknowledges that the Veteran submitted a Rapid Appeals Modernization Program (RAMP) opt-in election form that was received by VA on June 15, 2018. However, the appeal for the ¬¬¬¬¬¬¬instant claim has already been activated at the Board and is therefore no longer eligible for the RAMP program at this time. Accordingly, the Board will undertake appellate review of the case. 1. Entitlement to a TDIU The Veteran has been granted a 100 percent schedular rating for service-connected dysthymic disorder with polysubstance dependence, also claimed as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), sleep disturbances, depression, and anxiety, in a separate, concomitant decision, and thus the matter of entitlement to TDIU as it pertains specifically to that disability is largely moot. However, a review of the record shows he has not limited his appeal seeking TDIU to only the effects of that service-connected disability. In fact, his substantive appeal expressly alleges that he “developed depression and other illnesses which now prevents [sic] [him] from being able to work.” Crucially, as he had never previously met the schedular criteria for TDIU and this appeal was inextricably intertwined with another seeking a higher rating for his psychiatric disability (which was previously remanded by the undersigned for issuance of a statement of the case), substantive consideration thereof has been deferred. Now, the Veteran not only meets the schedular criteria for TDIU, but has also been awarded a 100 percent rating for a single disability, which raises the question of whether, in the context of TDIU, another disability might, on its own, render him unable to obtain substantially gainful employment such that the Board would be compelled by law to also consider whether special monthly compensation (SMC) is warranted based on “statutory housebound status” under 38 U.S.C. § 1114(s) as part and parcel of the present appeal. Considering the above, the Board finds that additional development is needed to ascertain the occupational impact of the Veteran’s non-psychiatric service-connected disabilities. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain all updated records (i.e., those not already of record) of VA and adequately identified private treatment the Veteran has received for the disabilities remaining on appeal. 2. Then, arrange for the Veteran to be examined by as many appropriate physicians as necessary to determine the current severity and occupational impact of his non-psychiatric service-connected disabilities (i.e., migraine headaches, left ankle fracture residuals, tinnitus, left second metacarpal fracture residuals, left thumb fracture residuals, right knee laceration injury scar, hearing loss, and pseudofolliculitis barbae). Based on an examination, review of the record, and any tests or studies deemed necessary, the examiner should describe all pathology, symptoms (frequency and severity), and functional impairment associated with such disabilities in sufficient detail to allow for application of the pertinent rating criteria. The examiner should specifically describe the impact such disabilities have, both on their own and in the aggregate, on the Veteran’s ability to function in an occupational environment. All opinions must include a complete rationale citing to supporting factual evidence and medical literature as appropriate. J. CONNOLLY Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD M. Yuan, Associate Counsel