Citation Nr: 21065830 Decision Date: 10/27/21 Archive Date: 10/27/21 DOCKET NO. 19-24 171 DATE: October 27, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a 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 January 1963 to April 1967. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a rating decisions issued in December 2016 by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office. In March 2021, the Veteran and his spouse testified at a hearing before the undersigned Veteran's Law Judge. A transcript of the hearing is associated with the record. At such time, the undersigned held the record open for 60 days, which was extended another 90 days in June 2021 for the submission of additional evidence; however, none has been received to date. The Board observes that, in his August 2019 substantive appeal and at the March 2021 hearing, the Veteran alleged that his PTSD rendered him unemployable. Therefore, the Board has assumed jurisdiction over the issue of entitlement to a TDIU as part and parcel of his initial rating claim. Rice v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 447 (2009). The Board also notes that the Veteran was previously represented by Ms. Betty Jones, an agent, in his appeal. However, in June 2021, he revoked her representation and, as such, he is currently unrepresented in the present appeal. 1. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 50 percent for PTSD. At the March 2021 Board hearing, the Veteran reported that he receives ongoing VA treatment for his PTSD as he sees a psychiatrist every 90 days. He also indicated that he believed that such treatment records more accurately represented the nature and severity of his PTSD. However, the record only includes VA treatment records dated through September 2016. Consequently, a remand is necessary in order to obtain updated VA treatment records. The Board also finds that a remand is necessary in order to afford the Veteran a contemporaneous VA examination so as to determine the current nature and severity of his PTSD. In this regard, the Board observes that he was last examined by VA in October 2016; however, since such time, he has alleged increased and additional PTSD symptomatology, to include suicidal and homicidal ideation, panic attacks, and aggressive behavior. Therefore, as the evidence suggests that the Veteran's PTSD symptomatology may have increased in severity since the October 2016 VA examination, a remand is necessary in order to afford him for an appropriate VA examination in order to assess the current nature and severity of such service-connected disability. See Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400 (1997); Caffrey v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 377 (1994); VAOPGCPREC 11-95 (1995). 2. Entitlement to a TDIU. As indicated in the Introduction, the Veteran's claim for a TDIU is considered part and parcel of his claim for a higher initial rating for PTSD. See Rice, supra. Thus, on remand, the Veteran should be requested to complete and return VA Form 21-8940 (Veteran's Application for Increased Compensation Based on Unemployability), and, thereafter, the AOJ should review the record and conduct any indicated development deemed necessary for the adjudication of such claim. Accordingly, the matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. The Veteran should be requested to complete and return VA Form 21-8940 (Veteran's Application for Increased Compensation Based on Unemployability). Thereafter, the AOJ should review the record and conduct any indicated development deemed necessary for the adjudication of such claim. 2. Obtain the Veteran's updated VA treatment records dated from September 2016 to the present. 3. Afford the Veteran an appropriate VA examination so as to determine the nature and severity of his PTSD. The record, to include a copy of this remand, should be provided to the examiner and all indicated tests should be conducted. Thereafter, the examiner should describe the nature and severity of all manifestations of the Veteran's PTSD, to include the resulting impact on his occupational and social functioning. A rationale for any opinion offered should be provided. A. JAEGER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Dawn A. Leung, Associate 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.