PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) decisions — 2001

The Board found that the veteran's claim for service connection for chloracne as secondary to Agent Orange exposure was denied due to lack of a confirmed diagnosis and no evidence showing it became manifest within one year of service.

The Board has denied the appellant's claims for service connection for PTSD, rheumatoid arthritis, and depression, chronic fatigue, and migraine headaches as secondary to his service-connected low back disability. The claim for an increased evaluation for lumbar scoliosis was also denied.

The veteran's post-traumatic stress disorder has resulted in significant occupational and social impairment, warranting a 70 percent rating.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not meet the criteria for service connection for PTSD, headaches, sinus disorder, high blood pressure, bilateral foot disorder, left toe fracture, or skin disorder of the hands and feet.

The Board denied the veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for PTSD, finding that there was no credible evidence of an in-service stressor and thus insufficient basis for a diagnosis of PTSD.

The Board found that the original grant of service connection for PTSD was clear and unmistakably erroneous, leading to an undebatably incorrect adjudicative result. As a result, the RO proposed severing service connection for PTSD, which was subsequently denied.

The VA granted service connection for PTSD and assigned a disability rating of 50 percent, effective from the date that the veteran submitted his claim in February 1996.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for further medical evaluation regarding the veteran's PTSD and its relation to service.

The veteran was found to be unemployable due to his PTSD and major depression, entitling him to a 100% schedular evaluation for these conditions and TDIU effective June 26, 2001.

The veteran's PTSD is rated at 10 percent, and his diabetes mellitus, hypertension, alcoholic hepatitis, sinusitis, and kidney stones are each rated at 10 percent. The Board found that the veteran's disabilities do not meet the criteria for a higher rating or pension benefits due to unemployability.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete records and further development is needed, including obtaining service medical records, post-service treatment records, and verifying stressors for PTSD diagnosis.

The Board has restored the veteran's service connection for PTSD, finding that the original grant of service connection was not clearly and unmistakably erroneous.

The Board has remanded the veteran's claims for service connection due to insufficient evidence regarding his claimed stressors and exposure, as well as a need to verify these allegations. The veteran needs to provide additional medical opinions and corroborative evidence.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been received to reopen the veteran's claim of service connection for PTSD, which was previously denied in 1992.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals has determined that the veteran's PTSD is due to in-service stressors and finds it incurred during her military service. As a result, the veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD is granted.

The veteran's PTSD was rated at 50 percent from February 21, 1997 to September 29, 1999. After that date, the rating was increased to 70 percent.

The Board has determined that the veteran's PTSD does not warrant a rating higher than 10 percent since August 17, 1998.

The Board has determined that the veteran's PTSD does not meet or approximate the criteria for a rating in excess of 30 percent, as his symptoms do not warrant a higher evaluation based on the severity and impact of his condition.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim of service connection for hepatitis, finding that new and material evidence had been presented. The claim is now before the Board to determine if service connection should be granted.

The veteran's PTSD is currently rated at 30 percent, which is the maximum schedular rating for this condition. The Board found that his symptoms do not warrant a higher rating and denied his claim for an increased disability rating. Additionally, he was not granted a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities.