Acquired psychiatric disorder decisions — 2010

The Board denied service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, including PTSD, finding that there was no credible evidence of a verified in-service stressor and the Veteran's current psychiatric condition is not related to his military service.

The Board has granted service connection for residuals of a right ankle injury and a right foot disorder, finding that these conditions are at least as likely as not related to the Veteran's in-service motor vehicle accident. Service connection was denied for renal trauma.

The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for the additional dependency allowance is granted, as he was eligible based on a combined evaluation at or above 30 percent for his service-connected disabilities since May 4, 1987.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for residual schizophrenia and a compensable evaluation for bilateral sensorineural hearing loss, finding that his disability picture did not warrant a higher rating based on the evidence of record.

The Board found no evidence to support the Veteran's claims of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability, bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, and a right leg injury. The preponderance of the evidence is against these claims.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for a psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD, is being remanded due to the need for additional development and consideration of the revised PTSD regulations.

The Board found no evidence of a current psychiatric disorder related to service and denied the Veteran's claim for service connection. The hearing loss rating was also denied.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to determine if the Veteran's current acquired psychiatric disorder, including depression, is related to his military service. The case will be returned for this purpose.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been received to reopen the Veteran's claim for service connection for schizoaffective disorder. The remaining issue of whether he is entitled to service connection for any other acquired psychiatric disorders, including bipolar disorder, depression, and schizophrenia, will be remanded for further development.

The Board determined that new and material evidence had not been received to reopen the previously denied claim of service connection for a psychiatric disorder.

The Board has remanded the issues of entitlement to service connection for glaucoma and an acquired psychiatric disability due to incomplete evidence and need for expert opinion.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for a bilateral leg condition and an acquired psychiatric disorder are being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining VA treatment records and determining if he is receiving Social Security Administration benefits.

The Board denied service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, finding no evidence linking the condition to service or a service-connected disability. The TDIU claim was also denied as the Veteran's combined rating of 60% did not meet the requirements for a TDIU under 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a).

The Board has remanded the case due to outstanding VA treatment records and the need for a medical examination to address the issues of service connection for drug and alcohol dependence and psychiatric disability.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development due to concerns about the adequacy of medical reports and the need for a VA examination.

The Board found that the Veteran does not meet the criteria for a diagnosis of PTSD and therefore denied his claim for service connection.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining SSA records and VA medical records from Tuscaloosa VAMC.

The Veteran's claim for increased ratings for his service-connected paranoid schizophrenia was denied as the evidence did not meet the criteria for a rating in excess of 50 percent prior to March 19, 2007 and 70 percent since that date.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including a VA examination to determine if the Veteran's psychiatric disability, including PTSD, is related to his service. The Veteran will be provided an opportunity to submit additional evidence and respond to the supplemental statement of the case.

The Board is remanding the case for additional development, including obtaining Army Reserve medical records and providing VCAA notice that complies with Kent v. Nicholson.