PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) decisions — 2002

The veteran's PTSD has been rated at 50 percent since September 8, 2000 and the Board found that a higher evaluation is not warranted for this period. For the period from March 20, 1997 to September 7, 2000, the disability was rated at 30 percent.

The Board denied the veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for PTSD, finding that her symptoms have not been attributed to a verified in-service stressor.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals has determined that the veteran does not have PTSD and therefore denied his claim for service connection.

The Board found that the veteran's claimed psychiatric disorders, including PTSD, were not incurred in or aggravated by service and denied his claim.

The VA has determined that the veteran's PTSD does not warrant an evaluation in excess of 50 percent.

The veteran's claim for TDIU benefits prior to November 3, 1993 was denied as he did not meet the criteria for a total disability rating due to service-connected disabilities.

The veteran's PTSD was not incurred or aggravated by service, as he did not engage in combat and the claimed stressors were not verified.

The veteran withdrew their appeal, effectively dismissing the case.

The VA denied the veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for PTSD, finding that there was no credible supporting evidence for the claimed in-service stressor and that the veteran did not engage in combat with the enemy during his active duty.

The veteran does not have current credible evidence of PTSD and the Board finds that his claim for service connection is denied.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the claim of service connection for PTSD, which was previously denied in 1989.

The Board denied the veteran's claim of service connection for PTSD, finding that there was insufficient evidence to support a diagnosis and no verified stressors.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for an effective date earlier than April 13, 1999 for a 100% rating for PTSD based on an initial award and denied his claims for increased ratings for bilateral pes planus with calluses and hammertoes and tinea pedis.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claims for PTSD and asbestosis, but has not decided whether these conditions were incurred or aggravated by service. The evidence submitted since the last decisions supports reopening of both claims.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for PTSD, coronary artery disease with hypertension (to include as secondary to PTSD), bilateral hearing loss, a skin disorder related to Agent Orange exposure, and hematuria. The reasons were that there was no credible evidence of in-service stressors supporting the diagnosis of PTSD, no causal relationship between the current heart condition and service-connected disorders, no compensable hearing loss during the first post-service year, no proof of in-service exposure to an herbicide agent for any claimed conditions, and no disability found for hematuria.

The Board found that the veteran did not meet the criteria for service connection as his claimed psychiatric disorder was not shown to be related to his military service, including combat exposure. The claim was denied.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have PTSD and denied service connection for this condition. The issue of service connection for a left ear disorder is inextricably intertwined with the issue of hearing loss, which requires further development.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence was submitted to reopen the veteran's claim of service connection for PTSD. The claim is granted as the veteran engaged in combat during his active duty, which establishes a link between his current PTSD symptoms and his military service.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for a rating in excess of 50 percent for service-connected PTSD, finding that her symptoms did not warrant a higher evaluation.

The VA denied the appellant's claims for an increased rating for post-traumatic stress disorder and a total rating based on individual unemployability. The VA found that his condition did not meet criteria for a higher disability evaluation or a total rating due to his service-connected PTSD.