Citation Nr: 21067385 Decision Date: 11/04/21 Archive Date: 11/04/21 DOCKET NO. 17-32 360 DATE: November 4, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial disability rating higher than 50 percent for a service-connected acquired psychiatric disorder, to include unspecified anxiety disorder, claimed as 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 had active service from October 1969 to August 1973. This matter is on appeal from a January 2014 rating decision. At that time, the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) granted service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, with a 30 percent disability rating, effective May 6, 2013. In an April 2017 rating decision, the AOJ granted a 50 percent disability rating, effective May 6, 2013. The Veteran had a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in October 2021, following his request to reschedule his 2019 Board hearing. At that hearing, the Veteran indicated he is unemployable due to his acquired psychiatric disorder. As reflected in the characterization of the appeal (on the title page), the Board considers the matter of the Veteran's entitlement to a TDIU due to his acquired psychiatric disorder as a component of the claim for a higher rating for that disability. See Rice v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 447 (2009). 1. Entitlement to an initial disability rating higher than 50 percent for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include unspecified anxiety disorder, is remanded. During his October 2021 Board hearing, the Veteran claimed that his acquired psychiatric disorder was more severe than indicated by a 50 percent disability rating. He last received a VA examination in January 2014. The Veteran should be provided an opportunity to report for a VA examination to ascertain the current severity and manifestations of his disability. During his Board hearing, the Veteran also appears to have claimed to be unemployable due to his acquired psychiatric disorder. Therefore, upon remand, the AOJ should conduct all appropriate development, to include providing the Veteran with Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000 (VCAA)-compliant notice as to a TDIU, requesting he complete and return VA Form 21-8940 (Veteran's Application for Increased Compensation Based on Unemployability), obtaining any outstanding treatment records, and affording any VA examinations or opinions deemed necessary to decide the claim. The matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. The Veteran should be provided with proper VCAA notice that informs him of the evidence and information necessary to establish entitlement to a TDIU. He should also be requested to complete and return VA Form 21-8940 (Veteran's Application for Increased Compensation Based on Unemployability). 2. The Veteran should be given an opportunity to identify any outstanding private or VA treatment records relevant to the claims on appeal. After obtaining any necessary authorization from the Veteran, all outstanding records, should be obtained. 3. Obtain any unassociated VA treatment records, to include any treatment records from the Vero Beach clinic, and any records for the period from 2014 to the present. 4. Schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the current severity of his service-connected unspecified anxiety disorder. The examiner should provide a full description of the disability and report all signs and symptoms necessary for evaluating the Veteran's disability under the rating criteria. The examiner must attempt to elicit information regarding the severity, frequency, and duration of symptoms. To the extent possible, the examiner should identify any symptoms and social and occupational impairment due to his service-connected psychiatric disorder alone. (Continued on the next page) 5. Perform any additional development deemed warranted to develop the increased rating and TDIU claims. H.M. WALKER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Lindio 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.