Citation Nr: 21011266 Decision Date: 03/01/21 Archive Date: 03/01/21 DOCKET NO. 15-01 782 DATE: March 1, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a rating in excess of 50 percent prior to January 11, 2018, for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) with parasomnia is remanded. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from April 1968 to April 1970. This matter comes before the Board of Veteran’s Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2009 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran testified at a Travel Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in December 2017. A transcript of the hearing is of record. The Board remanded this matter in May 2018. The Board notes that in a June 2020 correspondence, the Veteran’s representative requested a Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC). However, the Board notes that in February 2020, a statement of the case (SOC) addressed the PTSD with parasomnia rating. Although the Veteran’s representative may not have originally received this SOC due to a change of address, in February 2021, the Veteran’s representative was provided with a complete record of the claims file on CD. Therefore, the Board find that the duty to assist has been fulfilled. 1. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 50 percent prior to January 11, 2018, and in excess of 100 percent thereafter for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) with parasomnia is remanded. Pursuant to the May 2018 Board remand, the RO scheduled a VA examination in February 2020 for the Veteran to determine the current severity for his PTSD with parasomnia. The Veteran missed this VA examination for good cause. Specifically, in a March 2020 correspondence, the Veteran’s representative said that the Veteran was unable to attend the scheduled examination because he was unable to travel without assistance. The Board notes that despite missing this VA examination, in a February 2020 rating decision, the RO increased the Veteran’s PTSD with insomnia rating from 50 percent to 100 percent, from January 11, 2018. Nonetheless, the Veteran’s last VA examination for PTSD was in May 2012. Thus, the Board finds that a retrospective VA opinion would be helpful to determine the severity of the Veteran’s PTSD with parasomnia from July 22, 2008, to January 10, 2018. Moreover, there is evidence that there might be outstanding records. Specifically, treatment records from the Vet Center in 2017 note that the Veteran attended Readjustment Counseling Services weekly. Therefore, the RO must obtain any outstanding treatment records from 2008 to the present. Thus, on remand, the RO should obtain additional outstanding treatment records from 2008 to the present. Additionally, a retroactive VA opinion should be obtained to determine the severity of the Veteran’s PTSD with parasomnia from July 22, 2008, to January 10, 2018. 2. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) is remanded. The matter of entitlement to a TDIU remains inextricably intertwined with the Veteran’s claim for entitlement to an increased PTSD with parasomnia rating. Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180 (1991). Accordingly, remand of the inextricably intertwined TDIU claim is required. The matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Obtain any outstanding VA or private treatment records. Request that the Veteran assist with locating these records, if possible. Associate these records with the claims file. 2. Then, obtain a retroactive VA opinion from an appropriate examiner to determine the severity of the Veteran’s PTSD with parasomnia from July 22, 2008, to January 10, 2018. The claims file and a copy of this remand must be made available for review. All necessary tests and studies should be conducted. It should be noted that the Veteran has stated that the is unable to travel to an examination, so if an examination is found to be necessary, it should be conducted using video conference or telephone. (Continued on the next page)   A clear rationale must be provided for all opinions expressed. The examiner must consider the Veteran’s lay statements. If the examiner is unable to provide an opinion without resorting to mere speculation, then the examiner must state this and provide any information needed to make an opinion, if possible. 3. Thereafter, readjudicate the claim on appeal. If the benefit sought remains denied, issue the Veteran and his representative a supplemental statement of the case and provide a reasonable opportunity to respond before returning the matter to the Board for further appellate review. MICHAEL MARTIN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Saudiee Brown 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.