PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) decisions — 2007

The Board has determined that the veteran's reported in-service stressors are credible and have established service connection for PTSD.

The veteran's claims for PTSD and a skin disorder due to Agent Orange exposure are being remanded for further development of medical evidence.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for PTSD, degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine, and residuals of a right pneumothorax. The claim for an increased disability rating for bunionectomy, left great toe, was remanded due to further development being required.

The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected PTSD manifested by brief periods of depressed mood, insomnia, nightmares, intrusive thoughts of war experiences, hypervigilance, and a GAF score of 60 does not warrant a disability rating in excess of 50 percent.

The veteran's PTSD is manifested by occupational and social impairment with deficiencies in most areas, such as work, school, family relations, judgment, thinking, or mood. The VA has determined that a higher initial rating of 70 percent for PTSD is warranted.

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

The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings and earlier effective dates for his service-connected shell fragment wounds, finding that there was no factual basis to grant these benefits prior to April 23, 2003.

The VA denied an increased rating for the veteran's PTSD, currently evaluated at 50 percent.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining Social Security Administration records and providing notice on disability rating and effective date.

The veteran's claims for increased ratings have been denied. The Board found that the evidence did not support a finding of more severe incomplete paralysis or nerve damage, and thus no higher ratings could be granted.

The Board denied an increased evaluation for PTSD and a right ankle disorder.

The Board has remanded the case for further development due to inconsistencies in the evidence and need for additional examinations.

The Board denied the claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD, finding that there was no evidence of a confirmed in-service stressor and that the appellant's report of burial duty while stationed at Norfolk, Virginia, is not corroborated.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have service connection for PTSD or tinnitus due to lack of evidence linking these conditions to his military service. The tuberculous epididymitis is currently rated at 10%.

The Board denied a disability rating in excess of 10 percent for post-operative scar residuals of pilonidal cyst and denied service connection for a psychiatric disability, to include an anxiety disorder and PTSD.

The Board found that the veteran's testicular mass was not present during service and is not related to active service, presumptively or otherwise. Therefore, service connection for a testicular mass as a result of exposure to herbicides (Agent Orange) is denied.

The Board has reopened the claim for service connection for a right ankle disability due to new and material evidence. However, it was determined that PTSD is not service-connected as there is no credible supporting evidence of the claimed in-service stressor. The arthritis of the back and legs were also found not to be service-connected.

The veteran was granted service connection for PTSD with schizophrenia effective from July 2, 2002. The claim was originally received on July 2, 2002, and the diagnosis of PTSD was first made in March 21, 2003.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development of his medical records, including from the VA hospitals in New Orleans and Washington D.C., as well as Social Security Administration (SSA) records. The case will be reviewed again after this information is obtained.

The veteran's service-connected disabilities are of such a nature and severity as to prevent him from securing or following a substantially gainful occupation, thus meeting the criteria for a TDIU.