PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) decisions — 2004

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for various conditions, including PTSD, fatigue, hair loss, lower extremity numbness, dry mouth, night sweats, painful joints, and migraine headaches. The decision found no current manifestations of these conditions.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD should be remanded to allow for additional development, including obtaining medical records and verifying in-service stressors.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claim for service connection for hypertension is granted, and he now has a current diagnosis of hypertension related to his active service. The issue of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, including PTSD, remains pending.

The Board found that the veteran does not have a current diagnosis of PTSD related to service and did not provide sufficient information for verification of any in-service stressor. Therefore, the claim for service connection for PTSD was denied.

The VA denied an initial rating higher than 30 percent for PTSD, finding that the veteran's symptoms did not meet the criteria for a higher rating based on occupational and social impairment.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have PTSD as a result of active military service.

The Board has remanded the case for further action due to the veteran's failure to appear at a previously scheduled hearing and his reported medical condition.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining stressor information and scheduling a comprehensive psychiatric examination. The veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD will be reconsidered based on the additional evidence.

The Board has deferred further appellate consideration due to the need for additional development, including verification of combat participation and PTSD stressors.

The Board has received notification from the appellant that he wishes to withdraw his appeal, leading to its dismissal.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals denied the veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD, finding that there was no evidence to support a diagnosis of PTSD and concluding that his symptoms did not meet the criteria for this condition.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining the veteran's personnel records and verifying stressors. The veteran is to be examined by a VA psychiatrist to determine if PTSD symptoms are related to any verified in-service stressors.

The veteran's PTSD has been rated at 50 percent since September 1992 and increased to 70 percent effective June 30, 2003. The Board is considering whether the veteran should receive higher ratings for his PTSD.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for PTSD, a seizure disorder, and secondary service connection for low back, pelvic tilt, and numbness of the right foot disorders. The appeals were remanded to the RO for additional development.

The Board has determined that the veteran met the criteria for a 70 percent evaluation for PTSD and entitlement to TDIU as of July 14, 1997. The effective date for these grants is set at January 1, 1998.

The veteran's PTSD was rated at 50 percent from September 21, 1995 to February 27, 2003, and in excess of 50 percent from February 28, 2003.,The veteran's bilateral hearing loss was rated as 30 percent from September 21, 1995 to February 19, 2003, and in excess of 30 percent from February 20, 2003.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for a new examination and additional records, as well as providing notice of what evidence he needs to provide.

The Board denied the claim seeking to reopen service connection for PTSD due to lack of new and material evidence. The loss of teeth was also denied as unrelated to service or a service-connected disability.

The veteran's request for service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is being remanded due to the need for a hearing before a member of the Board at the RO.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete records and a need for VCAA compliance.