PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) decisions — 2006

The veteran's PTSD manifestations from October 26, 1998, to February 4, 2003, produced moderate disturbances of motivation and mood. From February 4, 2003, the manifestations more nearly approximated serious symptoms that produce deficiencies in most areas such as work, school, family relations, judgment, thinking, or mood, and inability to establish and maintain effective relationships.

The Board has determined that the veteran's PTSD is related to his military service and has granted service connection for this condition.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals found that the veteran does not have an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD, which is related to his military service.

The veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD is being remanded due to the need for additional VCAA notice and development.

The veteran's PTSD has been granted an initial evaluation of 70 percent effective May 16, 1996. The RO found that the preponderance of evidence demonstrated severe impairment in social and occupational functioning due to PTSD.

The Board has deferred further appellate consideration due to insufficient evidence to verify the veteran's claimed stressors during service in Vietnam, and requests for verification of these stressors are made. The case is remanded for additional development including obtaining records from mental health treatment, verifying combat participation or verified stressors, and providing a VA examination.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for a nervous disorder, including PTSD, and for exposure to 'Agent Orange' due to lack of medical evidence supporting these claims.

The Board denied the veteran's claims of service connection for ulcerative colitis and low back disability, but granted his claim for PTSD. The decision also addressed whether new and material evidence had been received to reopen the claims for these conditions.

The Board is considering the veteran's claims for service connection for various conditions, including PTSD and undiagnosed illness-related symptoms. The decision is mixed as some issues are granted while others are denied.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient verification of in-service stressors and a need for further examination.

The veteran's PTSD was initially evaluated as 10 percent disabling from September 27, 2001, to July 6, 2004. Since then, he has been rated at 30 percent for the condition.

The Board has reopened the claim for service connection of PTSD and determined that new evidence supports a diagnosis of PTSD related to in-service stressors. The veteran's current psychiatric disability is diagnosed as PTSD, which developed from witnessing an aircraft crash during active duty.

The Board has determined that further development is needed, including verifying the veteran's claimed stressors and scheduling a VA psychiatric examination. The case will be returned to the Board for readjudication.

The Board has granted service connection for hepatitis C, finding that the veteran's current diagnosis is related to his in-service receipt of tattoos. Service connection for PTSD was not addressed due to a lack of evidence.

The Board is requesting additional development to determine if the veteran has hypertension and whether it is related to service. The claims for arthritis of the right upper arm and shoulder, PTSD, and reopening of a claim for hypertension will be reconsidered based on this new information.

The VA has determined that the veteran's PTSD warrants a disability rating of 50 percent from September 19, 2001 to July 6, 2003.

The veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for the establishment of service connection for PTSD was denied as there is no legal basis to award such a date. The appeal regarding competency was found to be competent.

The veteran's case is being remanded for a hearing before a Veterans Law Judge at the RO in Cleveland, Ohio. The Board will then return it to the AMC for further action.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development of evidence, including verifying a claimed in-service stressor related to PTSD and obtaining medical opinions regarding the diagnosis and etiology of PTSD.

The veteran's appeal for more than a 10 percent rating for tinnitus has been dismissed as he did not submit a Substantive Appeal. The Board does not have jurisdiction to decide this issue.