Citation Nr: 21008110
Decision Date: 02/11/21	Archive Date: 02/11/21

DOCKET NO. 18-07 113
DATE: February 11, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to a rating in excess of 30 percent for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded.

A total disability rating based on individual unemployability as a result of service-connected disabilities (TDIU) is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran had active service from December 1984 to December 2008, to include service in Southwest Asia.

In August 2019, the Board denied the increased rating claim for PTSD, which the Veteran appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (“CAVC” or “the Court”).  In July 2020, the Court issued an order that vacated the Board decision and remanded the claim for compliance with a Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMPR).

In November 2019, the RO granted service connection for obstructive sleep apnea, and in June 2020, the RO granted service connection for carpal tunnel syndrome.  This represents a complete grant of his appeal in regard to these claims.  See Grantham v. Brown, 114 F.3d 1156 (Fed. Cir. 1997).  These issues are no longer before the Board.

Regarding the claim for an increased rating for PTSD, the Veteran was last afforded a VA examination for his PTSD in March 2016.  In his June 2016 notice of disagreement and February 2018 substantive appeal, the Veteran reported symptoms of his PTSD.  His lay statements describe worsening symptoms.

Accordingly, the record documents worsening of the Veteran’s PTSD symptoms.  His medical records regarding treatment for his PTSD should be updated, and he should be afforded a new VA examination to determine the current nature and severity of his PTSD.

Regarding the claim for a TDIU, in the JMPR, the parties agreed that the Veteran raised the issue of a TDIU as he reported that he had not worked since his separation from active service at the March 2016 VA examination.

Pursuant to Rice v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 447 (2009), a claim for a TDIU either expressly raised by the Veteran or reasonably raised by the record involves an attempt to obtain an appropriate rating for a disability and is part of the claim for an increased rating.  As such, the RO should adjudicate the issue of entitlement to a TDIU.

Finally, VA has added medical evidence into the record since the statement of the case (SOC) dated in December 2017, including treatment records and VA examinations regarding the Veteran’s PTSD.  All of this evidence is relevant and probative to the issues on appeal.  The claims must therefore be readjudicated in a new SSOC.  38 C.F.R. §§ 19.31, 20.1304(c)

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

1. With any necessary identification of sources by the Veteran, obtain all outstanding VA and private medical records that pertain to the Veteran’s PTSD.

2. Then, schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to assess the severity of his service-connected PTSD.

The examiner should consider the lay statements of the Veteran regarding his PTSD symptoms.

3. Adjudicate the issue of entitlement to a TDIU.

4. After the completion of any action deemed appropriate, the Veteran’s claims for an increased rating for PTSD and a TDIU should be readjudicated – with consideration of all relevant evidence received since the issuance of the statement of the case (SOC) in December 2017.  If the benefits sought remain denied, the Veteran should be provided a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) and given the opportunity to respond.

 

 

Kelli A. Kordich

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans’ Appeals

Attorney for the Board	T. Berryman, 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.