The veteran's claim for an increased rating for post-traumatic stress disorder was granted, and he is now rated at 30 percent. The total disability rating based upon individual unemployability due solely as the result of service-connected disabilities was also granted. However, the effective date prior to March 3, 1997 for a 30 percent disability evaluation for post-traumatic stress disorder could not be established.
The deciding factor: The veteran's claim for an increased rating for his post-traumatic stress disorder met the criteria and was granted as of the date of receipt of his claim. The total disability rating based upon individual unemployability due solely as the result of service-connected disabilities was also granted, but the effective date prior to March 3, 1997 could not be established.
- Claimed conditions
- post-traumatic stress disorder, residuals of second degree burns of the back and arms, left varicocele
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- 30%
- Decision date
- November 15, 2000
- Citation
- 0029940
This is a plain-language summary generated by AI from a public Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. It can contain errors — always verify against the original. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 0029940.
What this means for you
A grant means the Board agreed the veteran was entitled to the benefit. Decisions like this show the kind of evidence and arguments that tend to succeed for claims like it.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Granted
The Board has granted a 10 percent rating for the Veteran's service-connected left varicocele with surgical resection, finding that his symptoms are comparable to those of intermittent edema and fatigue after prolonged standing or walking.
- Denied
The Board has denied the Veteran's claims of service connection for irritable bowel syndrome, sleep apnea, post-traumatic stress disorder, and urinary frequency as there is no competent evidence linking these conditions to his military service.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of non-VA medical services provided on September 2, 2020 was denied under 38 U.S.C. § 1725 and 38 U.S.C. § 1728 due to lack of evidence in the file. The Board finds that remand is warranted for correction of errors in notice.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that the AOJ's decision denying eligibility for the Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers (PCAFC) is not supported by adequate reasoning and must be remanded to allow for a thorough review, including obtaining medical opinions on whether it is in the best interest of the Veteran to participate in the PCAFC program.
Free starter guide for your own claim
Reading this because you were denied or under-rated? Get the plain-English next steps — your appeal options, the deadline that protects you, and how appeals like yours turn out. One email, no spam.
We will only use this to send the guide. No spam, unsubscribe any time. We never sell your information.
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.