Citation Nr: 21014441
Decision Date: 03/12/21	Archive Date: 03/12/21

DOCKET NO. 12-16 751
DATE: March 12, 2021 

REMANDED

Entitlement to a rating greater than 50 percent for PTSD from September 7, 2010 to June 20, 2011, is remanded.

Entitlement to a rating greater than 50 percent for PTSD beginning September 1, 2011, is remanded.

Entitlement to a total disability rating for compensation based on individual unemployability (TDIU) due to service-connected disabilities is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran had active military service from May 1970 to May 1974.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from the February and December 2011 rating decisions of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).  

The Veteran appeared at a June 2013 hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge.  A transcript of the hearing is associated with the record.  

1. Entitlement to a rating greater than 50 percent for PTSD from September 7, 2010 to June 20, 2011, is remanded.

2. Entitlement to a rating greater than 50 percent for PTSD beginning September 1, 2011 is remanded.

3. Entitlement to a total disability rating for compensation based on individual unemployability (TDIU) due to service connected disabilities is remanded.

The Veteran’s most recent Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC) was issued in June 2020.  Subsequently, VA treatment records and VA examinations for separate disabilities were added to the Veteran’s claims file.   

In January 2021, the Board sent the Veteran a letter asking whether he wanted to submit a waiver to waive review by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) of the newly added evidence.  No response was received. 

When pertinent evidence is submitted by an appellant or representative and is received by the Board pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 19.37 (b), “[t]he Board will then determine what action is required with respect to the additional evidence.”  Here, the evidence was not submitted but rather was created by VA.  In these circumstances, a remand is warranted for initial AOJ review of the additional VA treatment records and examinations and, if the claim remains denied, issuance of a SSOC to the Veteran and his representative if necessary. See Sprinkle v. Shinseki, 733 F.3d 1180, 1184 (Fed. Cir. 2013).

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

1. The RO must review the Veteran’s VA treatment records and examinations and any other pertinent evidence received since the Veteran’s June 2020 SSOC. Then the RO should readjudicate the claims on appeal.

If any benefit sought on appeal remains denied, furnish the Veteran and his representative a SSOC and return the case to the Board.

2. Following completion of the above, and a review of any additional evidence received, the RO should also undertake any other development it deems to be necessary, to include, if warranted, an addendum medical opinion which considers any newly received evidence.

 

 

MICHAEL MARTIN

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans’ Appeals

Attorney for the Board	S. Mountford, 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.