Citation Nr: 20004428
Decision Date: 01/21/20	Archive Date: 01/17/20

DOCKET NO. 15-47 008
DATE: January 21, 2020

REMANDED

Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for right carpal tunnel syndrome disability is remanded.

Entitlement to a total disability rating due to individual unemployability (TDIU) is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Air Force from June 1971 to June 1975 and from January 1980 to January 1996. 

These matters were previously denied in an August 2018 Board decision, and the Veteran appealed the denial of his claims for the Court of Appeals of Veteran’s Claims (Court). 

1.  Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for right carpal tunnel syndrome disability is remanded.

Since this claim was last adjudicated by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) in a November 2015 statement of the case (SOC), additional VA medical records, including a November 2018 VA peripheral nerve examination, have since been associated with the claims file.  In a November 2019, the Veteran specifically requested that this claim be remanded to the AOJ for review of this additional evidence.  Accordingly, the Board will remand this matter for AOJ consideration of the additional evidence received in the first instance and issuance of a SSOC reflecting any further action required and consideration of that evidence.  See 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.31 (a), 19.37(a).

2.  Entitlement to a total disability rating due to individual unemployability (TDIU) is remanded. 

Since a decision on the claim for increased rating for right carpal tunnel syndrome disabilty could significantly impact a decision on the issue of entitlement to TDIU, the issues are inextricably intertwined.  A remand of the claim for TDIU is required.

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

1. After any additionally indicated development, has been completed, readjudicate the issues on appeal.  If the benefit sought is not granted to the Veteran’s satisfaction, send the Veteran and his representative a Supplemental Statement of the Case and provide an opportunity to respond.  If necessary, return the case to the Board for further appellate review.

 

 

K. J. ALIBRANDO

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans’ Appeals

Attorney for the Board	J. Murray, Counsel

The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.