Citation Nr: 21069459
Decision Date: 11/18/21	Archive Date: 11/18/21

DOCKET NO. 17-45 340
DATE: November 18, 2021

REMANDED

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

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Air Force from October 1966 to December 1969.   

This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from April 2015 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). 

In his July 2017 VA Form 9, the Veteran appealed a June 2017 Statement of the Case (SOC), which included the issue of entitlement to a higher rating for service-connected hypertension.  However, as the Veteran clearly stated that he only wishes to appeal the issue of entitlement to a TDIU, the issue of entitlement to a higher rating for hypertension is not before the Board.  See June 2017 VA Form 9.

In March 2021, the Veteran testified at a Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ); a transcript is of record. 

Entitlement to a TDIU

The Veteran claims that his service-connected disabilities render him unemployable.  See March 2021 Board hearing transcript.  For the reasons that follow, the Board finds that additional development is needed prior to adjudication. 

In this regard, the Veteran is service-connected for: (1) posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) rated 50 percent disabling from July 18, 2012 and 70 percent from December 20, 2012; (2) coronary artery disease (CAD) rated 60 percent disabling from July 18, 2012; and (3) hypertension (HTN) rated 10 percent disabling from December 29, 2015.  The Veteran's combined evaluation is 80 percent from July 18, 2012 and 90 percent from December 20, 2012.  Thus, the Veteran meets the schedular requirement for assignment of a TDIU under 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a). 

The Veteran was last provided a VA examination for his PTSD and CAD in June 2014.  In addition, the most recent VA treatment records on file for his PTSD and CAD are from March and June 2017.  Additionally, while a VA examination for hypertension was conducted in October 2020, the Veteran's blood pressure readings appeared to be elevated and it was noted that the disorder had progressively worsened.  Thereafter, the examiner indicated that his hypertension did not affect employment.  No rationale was provided. As such, the Board is unable to properly evaluate the current level of severity of the Veteran's service-connected disabilities and the extent of any occupational functional impairment.  Accordingly, more contemporaneous VA examinations are required to address to what extent his current service-connected disabilities impair his ability to perform tasks and responsibilities in a substantially gainful occupation.  38 C.F.R. §§ 3.326, 3.327.

Also, the Veteran's outstanding, relevant VA treatment records should be associated with the claims file.  38 C.F.R. § 3.159.

This matter is REMANDED for the following action:

1. Associate any outstanding VA treatment records with the claims file.  

2. Regarding the claim for a TDIU:

Schedule the Veteran for appropriate examinations by qualified clinicians to address the current level of severity of his PTSD, CAD, and HTN.

The examiners should elicit from the Veteran a complete educational, vocational, and employment history and should note his complaints regarding the impact of his service-connected disabilities on employment.  The examiners should identify all limitations or functional impairment caused solely by his service-connected disabilities.

3. After the above is complete, readjudicate the Veteran's claim.  If a complete grant of the benefits requested is not granted, issue a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) to the Veteran and his representative to afford them the opportunity to respond.

 

 

C. CRAWFORD

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	A. Kuzniar, 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.