PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) decisions — 2001

The VA Board has determined that the veteran's PTSD does not warrant a higher evaluation, as his symptoms do not meet the criteria for a 50% or higher rating. The current 30% evaluation adequately compensates for his disability.

The Board has determined that the veteran's multiple disabilities, including bipolar disorder and cervical spondylosis, render him permanently and totally unemployable, thus warranting a permanent and total disability rating for pension purposes.

The Board found that new and material evidence had not been submitted to reopen claims for service connection for depression, PTSD, or an eye disorder. However, the Board also noted that new evidence related to a possible stressor in service was relevant to the PTSD claim.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD should be remanded to allow for a VA psychiatric examination and additional development of records.

The veteran's service-connected post-traumatic stress disorder is productive of incapacitating symptoms resulting in total occupational and social impairment, warranting a 100 percent evaluation.

The appellant's PTSD is currently rated at 30 percent, and the RO needs to schedule a new examination to determine the current severity of his condition. The VA also needs to obtain all relevant medical records for consideration.

The veteran's PTSD is manifested by symptoms such as anger, depression, and suicidal thoughts. The Board has determined that the evidence supports a 70% evaluation for PTSD.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for further development, including obtaining a copy of D.J.R.'s personnel record and possibly conducting a new VA psychiatric examination.

The Board has determined that the veteran is entitled to increased ratings for PTSD from January 15, 1998 to March 26, 2000 (to a maximum of 30 percent), but not beyond. The veteran's PTSD was found to be manifested by mild symptoms before March 27, 2000 and moderate symptoms thereafter.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals has denied the veteran's claim for a rating in excess of 50 percent for his service-connected PTSD.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD due to new evidence, but denied the claim as there is no credible evidence of in-service stressors and the veteran did not engage in combat with the enemy.

The VA has determined that the veteran's PTSD, which is currently rated at 50 percent disabling, does not warrant a higher evaluation due to his unemployability being primarily attributed to alcohol abuse rather than solely to PTSD.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased rating of PTSD and service connection for left ear hearing loss and additional right fifth finger disability, finding that his PTSD did not meet criteria for a higher rating.

The veteran's claim for an increased evaluation of his service-connected PTSD with depression and alcohol/marijuana abuse is denied. The RO has assigned a 50 percent evaluation, effective October 1994.

The veteran's service-connected PTSD with bipolar disorder is productive of incapacitating symptoms resulting in total occupational and social impairment, warranting a 100 percent evaluation.

The veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for service connection of PTSD was denied as there is no evidence on file that can be construed as an informal claim prior to October 15, 1998.

The Board found that the RO's rating decisions did not contain clear and unmistakable error, thus denying the veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for a 100% disability rating for PTSD.

The VA Regional Office granted service connection for PTSD and assigned a 30 percent evaluation, effective February 8, 2000. The veteran's claim was not about service connection at all.

The veteran's PTSD with depression has rendered him demonstrably unable to obtain or retain substantially gainful employment, warranting a 100 percent evaluation.

The Board denied the appellant's claims for increased disability ratings and service connection, finding that his conditions did not meet the criteria for higher evaluations or additional benefits.