Citation Nr: 21061936 Decision Date: 10/05/21 Archive Date: 10/05/21 DOCKET NO. 14-32 164A DATE: October 5, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 50 percent for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities (TDIU) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from July 1965 to October 1968, with additional service in the Georgia National Guard. These matters are before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from January 2012 and July 2014 rating decisions issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). These issues were most recently before the Board in August 2020, at which time they was remanded for further development, as discussed below. 1. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 50 percent for PTSD is remanded. An August 2020 Board decision found that outstanding treatment records that were pertinent to the claims on appeal had not been associated with the claims file. The Board remanded this claim and directed the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) to obtain any outstanding treatment records from the VA Medical Centers (VAMC) in Atlanta, Georgia, and Los Angeles, California. Additionally, the AOJ was directed to obtain relevant and outstanding private treatment records from Dr. Richards, Dr. Schein, and Dr. Chacko, all of whom treated the Veteran for his service-connected psychiatric disability. 08/27/2020, BVA Decision. Subsequently, the Veteran informed VA that he had never been to California and had never received treatment at the VAMC in Los Angeles. And, the AOJ confirmed that an archived records search concluded with negative results at the VAMC in Los Angeles. 11/19/2020, VA 21-0820; 02/16/2021, Correspondence. The AOJ obtained additional VA treatment records from the VAMC in Atlanta, Georgia. See 05/04/2021, CAPRI (Atlanta VAMC records from April 2017 to February 2021). Some of these records were associated with the claims file after the issuance of the March 2021 supplemental statement of the case (SSOC). See 03/05/2021, CAPRI (Atlanta VAMC records from December 2020 to February 2021). Moreover, the Veteran also submitted additional private treatment records from Dr. Richards, Dr. Schein, and Dr. Chacko after the issuance of the SSOC. Likewise, after the issuance of the March 2021 SSOC, an additional VA examination assessing the severity of the Veteran's service-connected psychiatric disability was conducted in May 2021 and associated with the claims file. 05/11/2021, C&P Exam. And, a March 2021 psychiatric evaluation that was conducted by a private clinician was also subsequently associated with the claims file in April 2021, along with additional private treatment records from Dr. Richards, Dr. Schein, and Dr. Chacko. 04/02/2021, Medical Treatment Record Non-Government Facility (2 entries). The record reflects that relevant, private treatment records (4/2/2021 MTR-Non-Gov't Facility) and VA-generated evidence (4/2/21 MTR-Gov't Facility) has been added to the claims file since the Veteran's claims after the issuance of a new supplemental SOC (SSOC) and before the file transferred to the Board and a new SSOC was not issued. 38 C.F.R. § 19.31(b)(1) (2020). As this evidence was added after the 2021 SSOC and prior to the April 2021 transfer to the Board, a supplement statement of the case is needed. 38 C.F.R. § 19.37(a) (2020). Additionally, automatic waiver provisions do not apply to VA-generated evidence, such as VA examination reports or VA treatment records. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(e). The record is devoid of evidence that the Veteran was informed that he had 45 days to waive his right to have the AOJ review his newly received VA treatment records. As there is no indication that the Veteran has specifically waived initial AOJ adjudication of the treatment records, the Board finds that a remand is also required for the AOJ to consider this evidence in a SSOC to ensure the Veteran is afforded all due process. Additionally, while some relevant evidence was added after the April 2021 transfer to the Board, the Board finds sending a waiver letter is not in the interest of judicial economy (i.e., serving only to unnecessarily delay the appeal more) as this matter must be remanded for the reasons stated above. 2. Entitlement to a TDIU is remanded. The Board finds that entitlement to TDIU is inextricably intertwined with the rating issue for the psychiatric disability on appeal, which involves occupational impairment. See Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180, 183 (1991) (stating that 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). As such, the TDIU issue is remanded in conjunction with the psychiatric issue on appeal. These matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Obtain any outstanding VA treatment records. Additionally, request the Veteran to submit any relevant private treatment reports or provide VA with authorization to obtain any such records. (Continued on the next page) 2. Issue a supplemental statement of the case regarding the appeal for increased rating for a psychiatric disability and TDIU that considers all relevant evidence of record, to include any VA treatment/CAPRI records and private treatment records added since the March 2021 supplemental statement of the case. Paul Sorisio Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board David Han 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.