Citation Nr: 21073587 Decision Date: 12/09/21 Archive Date: 12/09/21 DOCKET NO. 18-36 482 DATE: December 9, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial rating greater than 50 percent prior to May 7, 2018, and greater than 70 percent from May 7, 2008, for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating greater than 10 percent for traumatic brain injury (TBI) is remanded. Entitlement to an initial compensable rating prior to May 4, 2018, and greater than 30 percent from May 4, 2018, for migraine headaches is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Marine Corps from August 2003 to April 2010. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2016 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs. In January 2021, the Veteran testified at a virtual hearing before the Board. A transcript of the hearing is of record. During the pendency of this appeal involving a higher initial rating for PTSD, the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) increased the rating from 50 to 70 percent effective May 7, 2018. The Veteran thereafter included the issue of entitlement to an effective date earlier than May 7, 2018, for the 70 percent rating for his PTSD in the appeal. In this regard, the Board notes that this issue is part and parcel of the present appeal for a higher initial rating for PTSD. In December 2014, the Veteran initiated an appeal of a May 2014 rating decision that continued noncompensable ratings for right and left knee disabilities and a 10 percent rating for a back disability. He initiated the appeal by filing a notice of disagreement (NOD) in December 2014. 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.20, 19.21. Although he appealed for "service connection" for these disabilities when he filed his NOD, the AOJ explained in the February 2016 statement of the case that it liberally construed his appeal as entitlement to increased ratings. 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.20, 19.29. That notwithstanding, the record does not contain a substantive appeal in the matter. 38 C.F.R. § 19.22. As such, this appeal has not been perfected for appellate review. 38 C.F.R. § 19.20. The Board further notes that the Veteran subsequently filed to "reopen" his claims for increased ratings for his right and left knee disabilities as well as for his back disability in January 2018 which the AOJ adjudicated in May 2018. Following the February 2016 rating decision (from which this appeal arises) and the AOJ's issuance of a statement of the case (SOC) in May 2018 and a supplemental SOC (SSOC) in September 2019, additional pertinent evidence has been associated with the claims file. This evidence includes a November 2020 TBI Disability Benefits Questionnaire (DBQ), a November 2020 PTSD DBQ, and VA outpatient treatment records. As this evidence is relevant to the claims for increased ratings for PTSD and TBI, it must be considered by the AOJ in the first instance. 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.31, 19.37(b). Regarding the claim for an increased initial rating for migraine headaches, the Veteran testified at the January 2021 Board hearing that his last VA examination in May 2018 for migraine headaches was not complete because the examiner did not record everything that he reported. He also testified that his symptoms had worsened since the examination. Accordingly, he should be afforded a new examination to accurately assess the current severity of this disability. See Olsen v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 480, 482 (1992), citing Proscelle v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 629, 632 (1992). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the current severity of his service-connected migraine headache disability. 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. 2. Issue a SSOC as to the issues on appeal which includes consideration of the November 2020 PTSD and TBI DBQs and pertinent VA treatment records on file, and any other evidence that has been received since the September 2019 SSOC. Kristin Haddock Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Shawkey, 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.