Citation Nr: 21009155 Decision Date: 02/19/21 Archive Date: 02/19/21 DOCKET NO. 17-04 616 DATE: February 19, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 50 percent prior to October 2017 for the Veteran's acquired psychiatric disabilities is remanded. Entitlement to an increased rating in excess of 70 percent from October 2017 for the Veteran's acquired psychiatric disabilities is 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 United States Air Force from June 1964 to June 1968. These matters come before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2015 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran was scheduled for a Board hearing on October 2018 but was unable to attend due to a serious illness requiring hospitalization. In a February 2019 decision, the Board granted an initial increased rating of 50 percent prior to October 2017 and a 70 percent thereafter for the Veteran’s acquired psychiatric disabilities. The Veteran appealed the February 2019 decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. In December 2019, the parties to the appeal filed a Joint Motion for Partial Remand. In January 2020, the Court granted the motion and vacated and remanded the case to the Board for further review. 1. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 50 percent prior to October 2017 for the Veteran’s acquired psychiatric disabilities is remanded. 2. Entitlement to an increased rating in excess of 70 percent from October 2017 for the Veteran’s acquired psychiatric disabilities is remanded. Unfortunately, the Board finds that additional development consistent with the January 2020 JMPR is necessary before a decision may be rendered on the issues on appeal. In the January 2020 JMPR, the parties stipulated that the Board erred when it failed to ensure compliance with its duty to assist in obtain potentially relevant records. The parties agreed that the Veteran was seen at Oakwood Southshore Medical Center, a private treatment center, for suicidal ideation on October 22, 2017. The Veteran was later transported to Harbor Oaks for continued care of his psychiatric disabilities. A November 2017 VA treatment records shows that the Veteran was admitted to an outside hospital, Harbor Oaks, from October 24, 2017 to October 31, 2017 for suicidal ideation. However, treatment records from a Harbor Oaks facility has not been associated with the Veteran’s claims file. The parties further stipulated that it is unclear whether the Veteran’s full treatment records at Oakwood Southshore Medical Center have been associated with his claims file. As such, efforts should be taken to obtain these relevant private treatment records. Additionally, the parties stipulated that while the Veteran was treated for suicidal ideation on October 22, 2017, it was noted that his treatment plan would include referral to Adult Protective Service due to concerns that he abused his wife. The parties stated these treatment records is relevant to the Veteran’s claim and efforts should be taken to obtain them on remand. The parties also stipulated that the Board failed to provide adequate reasons or bases for its denial of an initial rating in excess of 50 percent prior to October 2017 and an increased rating in excess of 70 percent thereafter. Particularly, the parties stated the Board failed to address relevant treatment records concerning the Veteran’s suicidal ideation and homicidal ideation throughout the period on appeal, particularly during March 2016 through July 2016. The parties also agreed that the Board did not provide an analysis regarding the severity and frequency of the Veteran’s symptoms shown in the October 22, 2017 inpatient treatment record suggesting that he may be a persistent danger to himself or others. As such, the parties agreed that adequate reasons and bases should be provided upon remand. Finally, the parties stipulated the Board erred in failing to consider whether entitlement to a total disability rating due to individual unemployability (TDIU). The parties noted his June 13, 2013 VA examination for his psychiatric disabilities shows he is currently unemployed and that he has not worked since 2002. Accordingly, as the evidence indicates that the Veteran has been unemployed since 2002, development of the Veteran’s TDIU is warranted upon remand. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain the requisite authorization and release from the Veteran and obtain all outstanding private and VA treatment records, to include treatment records from Harbor Oaks Hospital, Oakwood Southshore Medical Center, and Michigan Adult Protective Services and associate them with the claims file and associate them with the Veteran’s claims file. 2. After, send the Veteran a letter inviting him to submit any information needed to develop his TDIU claim, to include a VA Form 21-8940, Application for Compensation Based on Unemployability. 3. After, readjudicate the claim. If the benefit sought on appeal remains denied, furnish the Veteran with a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) and provide him with an appropriate opportunity to respond. M. Tenner Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Xiong, 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.