Citation Nr: 21011298 Decision Date: 03/01/21 Archive Date: 03/01/21 DOCKET NO. 17-44 375 DATE: March 1, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial disability rating in excess of 30 percent for Crohn’s disease is remanded. Entitlement to a total disability rating based upon individual unemployability (TDIU) due to service-connected disabilities from August 10, 2015, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from September 2000 to May 2001. These matters come to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from an April 2013 rating decision which granted service connection for Crohn’s disease, evaluated at 10 percent, effective July 31, 2012. In a February 2015 rating decision, the RO granted an increased 30 percent evaluation for Crohn’s disease, effective July 31, 2012. As this does not represent a maximum grant of the benefit sought on appeal, the issue remains pending before the Board. In August 2020, the Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) at a Board virtual hearing. A copy of the transcript is of record. The issue of entitlement to a total disability rating based upon individual unemployability (TDIU) has been raised by the record during the August 2020 Board hearing. The Board notes that TDIU was adjudicated in an August 2015 rating decision. The Veteran filed a timely notice of disagreement and a statement of the case (SOC) was issued in January 2020. In March 2020, the Veteran filed an untimely VA Form 9 (Appeal to Board of Veterans’ Appeals) and requested the RO accept the form as timely. To date, the RO has not adjudicated the timeliness of the VA Form 9 with respect to the issue of TDIU. While TDIU was denied in August 2015, the Board has jurisdiction to consider the issue of TDIU from August 10, 2015, as the issue has been raised since then as part of his claim for an increased rating. Rice v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 447, 453-54 (2009). Thus, this issue has been added to the appeal. The issue of whether a March 2020 VA Form 9 was timely is referred back to the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) for appropriate action. 1. Entitlement to an initial disability rating in excess of 30 percent for Crohn’s disease is remanded. During the August 2020 Board hearing, the Veteran asserted that he is having daily attacks of symptoms due to his Crohn’s disease, and that while over time, each of his medications have stopped working. The Veteran was last examined by VA in March 2016. In light of the nearly five years that has passed, and the Veteran’s assertions that he is having daily attacks, he should be provided an opportunity to report for a VA examination to ascertain the current severity and manifestations of his Crohn’s diease. 2. Entitlement to a total disability rating based upon individual unemployability (TDIU) due to service-connected disabilities from August 10, 2015 is remanded. Finally, because a decision on the remanded increased rating claim for Crohn’s disease and pending issue as to the timeliness of a March 2020 VA Form 9 could significantly impact a decision on the issue of entitlement to TDIU, the issues are inextricably intertwined. A remand of the claim for TDIU is required. The matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Obtain the Veteran’s VA treatment records for the period from January 2021 to present. 2. Schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the current severity of his service-connected Crohn’s disease. 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. 3. After completing the above, and any other development as may be indicated, the Veteran’s claims should be readjudicated based on the entirety of the evidence. If the claims remain denied, the Veteran and his representative should be issued a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC). An appropriate period of time should be allowed for response. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration, if otherwise in order. K. Parakkal Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Owen, 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.