PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) decisions — 2007

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the veteran's claimed stressors and the need for further examination.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim for service connection of PTSD based on new evidence that corroborates a claimed stressor. The case is now remanded to determine if the diagnosed PTSD is related to service.

The Board denied service connection for PTSD and did not reopen the claim of right ear hearing loss due to lack of new and material evidence.

The Board granted service connection for PTSD and assigned a 30 percent disability rating for pes planus with hallux valgus. The veteran's dermatophytosis was rated at the maximum allowable under the old criteria, which is 10 percent.

The veteran's claims for service connection for PTSD, heart condition, hypertension, hernia, and arthritis were all denied as there is no evidence of these conditions during his military service or that they are related to his military service.

The veteran's claim for service connection for onychomycosis is pending. The VA granted the claim of PTSD with a rating of 10 percent, but denied claims for higher ratings and TDIU.

The Board denied service connection for PTSD as there was no verified in-service stressor and the veteran did not engage in combat with the enemy.

The veteran's PTSD was manifested by substantial, but not total occupational and social impairment for the period from August 6, 2001 to May 5, 2004. The VA determined that an evaluation greater than 70 percent is not warranted.

The Board has determined that the veteran's PTSD warrants a disability rating of 70 percent, effective from the date of receipt of his initial claim.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining records and verifying an in-service stressor. The claim of service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder is being reviewed.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining information about claimed stressors and scheduling a VA psychiatric examination to determine if any current psychiatric disorders are related to service.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including verifying stressors and scheduling a VA psychiatric examination to determine if PTSD is related to service.

The veteran's service-connected disabilities, specifically including his PTSD, are found to be of such severity as to preclude him from obtaining or retaining substantially gainful employment.

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 found that the veteran's lumbar spine disability was not incurred in service and denied his claim. For PTSD, the Board determined that the current disability is not related to service and thus did not meet the criteria for a higher rating.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for PTSD and hypertension, finding no confirmed in-service stressors or verified medical diagnoses. The claim for secondary service connection for hypertension was also denied.

The veteran's appeal for an increased rating for PTSD is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including a new VA examination and consideration of recent medical records.

The Board has reopened the claim for service connection for PTSD and granted it, finding that new evidence supports a diagnosis of PTSD. The skin rash and neurological disorders are not related to service or exposure to Agent Orange.

The veteran is seeking restoration of a 100 percent rating for his PTSD, which was previously reduced to 50 percent. The RO has proposed reducing the rating again from 50 percent to 30 percent effective November 1, 2004. The veteran argues that there has been no sustained improvement in his PTSD symptoms since receiving a 100 percent rating.

The veteran requested to withdraw his appeal for an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for PTSD. As a result, the Board has dismissed the appeal.