Citation Nr: 22014480 Decision Date: 03/14/22 Archive Date: 03/14/22 DOCKET NO. 15-18 692 DATE: March 14, 2022 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for chronic myelogenous leukemia, to include as being due to herbicide exposure is remanded. Entitlement to a compensable initial disability rating for bilateral hearing loss prior to August 24, 2020 is remanded. Entitlement to a disability rating higher than 20 percent for bilateral hearing loss from August 24, 2020 is remanded. Entitlement to an initial disability rating higher than 50 percent for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) prior to June 18, 2015 is remanded. Entitlement to a disability rating higher than 70 percent for PTSD from June 18, 2015 is remanded. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from December 1965 through November 1968. The issues on appeal arise from the Veteran's July 2011, August 2011, and February 2012 claims and rating decisions issued by the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) in February 2012 and July 2012. The Veteran testified during a November 2018 Board hearing. A transcript is of record. In a December 2021 letter, VA notified the Veteran that the Veterans Law Judge who presided over his hearing was no longer employed at the Board. The Veteran was advised that he had the option of requesting a new Board hearing with a current Board member within 30 days from the date of VA's letter. The Veteran did not reply. The Veteran's appeal was remanded previously by the Board in December 2019. The issues remaining on appeal are subject to that remand and to partial grants provided by the AOJ in rating decisions issued to the Veteran in October 2020. The Veteran has not expressed satisfaction with those partial grants and VA presumes that he is continuing his appeal and is seeking the highest available possible benefits. Lastly, the Veteran has asserted in an August 2015 TDIU application that his service-connected disabilities prevent him from securing and following a substantially gainful occupation. The Veteran's Board hearing testimony suggests that the Veteran's PTSD symptoms significantly impacted his ability to work and caused him to take retirement from his occupation as a supervisor at a mining equipment manufacturing company. Although the Board notes that a November 2015 rating decision denied the Veteran's TDIU claim, the AOJ's decision does not consider the entire appeal period at issue. Under the circumstances, where it remains a persistent issue as to whether the Veteran's service-connected disabilities have affected his ability to secure and follow a substantially gainful occupation, the Board concludes that the evidence continues to raise the implicit issue of whether the Veteran is entitled to TDIU. Rice v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 447 (2009). 1. Social Security records. The record reflects that the Veteran reported during VA treatment in December 2011 that he was receiving Social Security disability benefits. A VA inquiry conducted in October 2015 with the Social Security Administration (SSA) confirmed that the Veteran has been receiving Social Security disability benefits with a disability onset in September 2009. It is likely that the Veteran's social security records contains additional evidence that is relevant to the disabilities here on appeal and that SSA maintains custody of those records and evidence. Under the circumstances, VA must undertake efforts to obtain the Veteran's Social Security records. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (c)(2); Golz v. Shinseki, 590 F.3d 1317, 1323 (Fed. Cir. 2010). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. The Veteran should be asked whether he has additional evidence pertaining to his leukemia, hearing loss, PTSD, and other service-connected disabilities. Records for relevant VA treatment received by the Veteran since July 2020 and any private treatment identified by the Veteran should be obtained. If the records are not available, such unavailability should be documented in the record. The Veteran should be notified of unsuccessful efforts in order to allow him the opportunity to obtain and submit those records for VA review. (Continued on the next page) 2. Obtain the Veteran's Social Security records. If the records are not available, such unavailability should be documented in the record. The Veteran and his representative should be notified of unsuccessful efforts in order to allow them the opportunity to obtain and submit those records for VA review. 3. After completion of the above development, the issues on appeal should be readjudicated. If the determination remains averse to the Veteran, he and his representative should be furnished with a SSOC and be given an opportunity to respond. DONNIE R. HACHEY Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board D.S. Lee 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.