Citation Nr: 21025647 Decision Date: 04/28/21 Archive Date: 04/28/21 DOCKET NO. 18-22 964 DATE: April 28, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an effective date prior to June 14, 2017 for the grant of a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from October 1965 to October 1967. Procedurally, an April 2020 Board decision noted that this appeal arose from an April 2015 agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) decision which granted service connection for unspecified anxiety disorder and assigned an initial 50 percent rating effective December 10, 2014; but also denied service connection for PTSD and entitlement to TDIU. In September 2015, the Veteran filed a timely notice of disagreement (NOD) regarding the initial rating for unspecified anxiety disorder and denial of service connection for PTSD. He also filed a formal claim for entitlement to TDIU. A March 2018 AOJ rating decision granted service connection for PTSD, continued a 50 percent evaluation for a disability phrased as PTSD with unspecified anxiety disorder (previously rated as unspecified anxiety disorder, and increased the evaluation to 70 percent effective June 14, 2017. Diagnostic Code 9411, which specifically pertains to rating PTSD, was applied for a period of time extending to December 10, 2014. Thus, this appeal extends to December 10, 2014. This matter was before the Board in April 2020, where it was remanded for additional development. Specifically, the Board determined that a medical assessment describing the functional effects of the Veteran’s service-connected PTSD with anxiety disorder has on his daily living and employment. Entitlement to an effective date prior to June 14, 2017 for TDIU is remanded. The Veteran seeks entitlement to an effective date earlier than June 14, 2017 for the award of a TDIU. Generally, to be eligible for a TDIU, a percentage threshold must be met. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.340, 3.341, 4.16(a). 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a) provides that consideration of such a rating is warranted if a veteran has one service-connected disability rated 60 percent or more or, if there are two or more such disabilities, there must be at least one that is rated 40 percent or more, with all disabilities combining to 70 percent or more. Prior to June 14, 2017, the Veteran did not meet the schedular criteria as his service-connected PTSD was rated at 50 percent disabling. Therefore, as a matter of law, the Veteran’s claim for an earlier effective date for an award of TDIU on a schedular basis must be denied. See Sabonis v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 426, 430 (1994). In instances where a veteran does not satisfy the schedular requirements, the extraschedular provision of 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(b) states that a claimant must show that he/she is unable to secure and follow a substantially gainful occupation by reason of service-connected disabilities in order to warrant a referral to the Director of Compensation Service, for extraschedular consideration. The appropriate standard for the Board when determining whether to remand a claim for TDIU pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(b) is whether there is sufficient evidence to substantiate a reasonable possibility that a veteran is unemployable by reason of his or her service-connected disabilities. See Ray v. Wilkie, 31 Vet. App. 58, 66 (2019). The record contains a statement from a VA staff psychiatrist dated April 1999 which indicated that the Veteran had chronic PTSD from the military and that [h]e is no longer able to work based upon his mental disorder.” This medical statement constitutes sufficient evidence to substantiate a reasonable possibility that this Veteran was unemployable by reason of his service-connected PTSD prior to June 14, 2017. Thus, the referral criteria of 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(b) have been met. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Forward the Veteran’s claim to the Director, Compensation Service, for consideration of the assignment of an extraschedular rating prior to June 14, 2017 for a total disability rating based upon individual unemployability due to his service-connected PTSD with anxiety disorder under 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(b). T. MAINELLI Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Adeleke, T. 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.