Citation Nr: 21004701 Decision Date: 01/27/21 Archive Date: 01/27/21 DOCKET NO. 10-46 908 DATE: January 27, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a rating in excess of 50 percent for an acquired psychiatric disability, based upon substitution, is remanded. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU), based upon substitution, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from August 1960 to May 1967. He died in October 2019. The appellant is his surviving spouse. These matters come before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2014 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). Substitution If a claimant dies while a claim for any benefit under a law administered by the Secretary, or an appeal of a decision with respect to such a claim, is pending, a living person who would be eligible to receive accrued benefits due to the claimant under section 5121(a) of this title may, not later than one year after the date of death of such claimant, file a request to be substituted as the claimant for the purposes of processing the claim to completion. 38 U.S.C. § 5121A (a). Here, the Veteran died in October 2019. At the time of his death, the Veteran had perfected his substantive appeal. In May 2020, his surviving spouse filed her application for substitution of claimant upon death of claimant. In November 2020, the appellant’s request for substitution was granted. See 38 U.S.C. § 5121A (a)(1). Therefore, the Board finds that the appellant has been properly substituted as the claimant for purposes of processing the Veteran’s claim to completion. All matters are remanded. The Board notes that the Veteran raised the issue of the adequacy of the March 2017 VA mental disorders examination. Specifically, in an August 2017 affidavit, the Veteran stated that the examination lasted only 15-20 minutes and the examiner omitted some of his symptoms. The appellant’s representative also raised the issue of the adequacy of a September 2018 VA mental disorders examination. In that regard, in an October 2018 correspondence, the representative stated that the examiner’s attribution of the Veteran’s cognitive impairments to a 2006 head injury was not supported by adequate rationale. The representative also stated that the September 2018 VA examiner did not reference Dr. W.A.’s findings, which were starkly different from the examiner’s and calls into question whether all relevant evidence was considered. The Board finds that a remand is necessary to obtain an addendum opinion from the September 2018 VA examiner. In that regard, there is evidence that the Veteran may have suffered from short term memory loss and other cognitive impairments following a 2006 accident at a waterfall. The Board requests that the examiner provide adequate rationale regarding all conclusions reached, including the conclusion that “memory and concentration impairments are more likely than not secondary to reported head injury in 2006.” The Board requests that the examiner also address Dr. W.A.’s April 2014 findings regarding the severity of the Veteran’s acquired psychiatric disability. The appellant contends that the Veteran’s psychiatric disability symptoms prevented him from obtaining and maintaining substantially gainful employment. Accordingly, the claims for entitlement to an increased rating for an acquired psychiatric disability and TDIU are inextricably intertwined. See Harris v. Derwinski,1 Vet. App. 180 (1991) (two issues are “inextricably intertwined” when they are so closely tied together that a final Board decision on one issue cannot be rendered until the other issue has been considered). Therefore, the claim for a TDIU must be remanded pending the development and readjudication of the increased rating appeal. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Obtain an addendum opinion from the September 2018 VA examiner (or an appropriate substitute) regarding the severity of the Veteran’s acquired psychiatric disability. The Veteran’s electronic claims folder, including a copy of this remand, should be provided to the examiner. The examiner should also indicate the functional impairment that resulted from the Veteran’s service-connected acquired psychiatric disability in terms of occupational functioning and daily activities. **The Board is returning the matter to the examiner for clarification of her opinion that the Veteran’s “memory and concentration impairments are more likely than not secondary to reported head injury in 2006.” ** **The Board also requests that the VA examiner also address Dr. W.A.’s April 2014 findings regarding the severity of the Veteran’s acquired psychiatric disability which the appellant’s representative contends is “starkly different,” from the September 2018 report. ** The supporting rationale for all opinions expressed must be provided. Michael A. Pappas Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Baskerville, LaRita 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.