Citation Nr: 1014763 Decision Date: 04/19/10 Archive Date: 04/30/10 DOCKET NO. 07-10 610 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Oakland, California THE ISSUE Entitlement to a schedular evaluation in excess of 70 percent for schizophrenia from January 1, 1965 to July 23, 1965; January 1, 1966 to December 7, 1969; and from February 1, 1970 to July 25, 1985. ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD LouElla Kuta, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from November 1951 to November 1955 and from July 1957 to April 1959. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2000 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Oakland, California, which denied the benefits sought on appeal. The Board initially notes that this matter has been addressed as entitlement to an effective date earlier than July 26, 1985 for the grant of a schedular 100 percent evaluation for schizophrenia in prior decisions by the RO and the Board. However, the Board has determined that this matter is most appropriately addressed as an increased rating claim for schizophrenia from January 1, 1965 to July 23, 1965; January 1, 1966 to December 7, 1969; and from February 1, 1970 to July 25, 1985. With the exception of these time periods, the Veteran has been assigned a 100 percent disability evaluation since the grant of service connection. In December 2005, the Board remanded the issue of entitlement to an effective date earlier than July 26, 1985 for the grant of a schedular 100 percent evaluation for schizophrenia in order for the RO to issue a statement of the case in this matter in compliance with Manlincon v. West, 12 Vet. App. 238 (1999). In compliance with the Board's instructions, a statement of the case was issued by the RO in March 2007. Please note this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2009). 38 U.S.C.A. § 7107(a)(2) (West 2002). FINDINGS OF FACT 1. For the period beginning January 1, 1965 to July 23, 1965, the Veteran was unemployed. 2. For the period beginning January 1, 1965 to July 23, 1965, the Veteran's paranoid schizophrenia was an active psychotic manifestation of such extent as to produce total social and industrial inadaptability. 3. The Veteran was gainfully employed beginning December 6, 1965. 4. The Veteran resigned his employment, effective November 27, 1969. 5. For the period beginning January 1, 1966 to December 7, 1969, the Veteran's paranoid schizophrenia was not an active psychotic manifestation of such extent, severity, depth, persistence or bizarreness as to produce total social and industrial inadaptability. 6. For the period beginning February 1, 1970 to July 25, 1985, the Veteran's paranoid schizophrenia produced total social and industrial inadaptability. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. For the period beginning January 1, 1965 to July 23, 1965, the criteria for the grant of a 100 percent schedular evaluation for paranoid schizophrenia have been met. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1155, 5110 (West 2002 & Supp. 2009); 38 C.F.R. § 4.130, Diagnostic Code 9203 (1966). 2. For the period beginning January 1, 1966 to December 7, 1969, the criteria for the grant of a 100 percent schedular evaluation for paranoid schizophrenia have not been met. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1155, 5110 (West 2002 & Supp. 2009); 38 C.F.R. § 4.130, Diagnostic Code 9203 (1966). 3. For the period beginning February 1, 1970 to July 25, 1985, the criteria for the grant of a 100 percent schedular evaluation for paranoid schizophrenia have been met. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1155, 5110 (West 2002 & Supp. 2009); 38 C.F.R. § 4.130, Diagnostic Code 9203 (1966). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Duties to Notify and Assist The Veterans Clams Assistance Act of 2000 (VCAA), as amended, and implementing regulations impose obligations on VA to provide Veterans with notice and assistance. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5102, 5103, 5103A, 5107, 5126 (West 2002 & Supp. 2009); 38 C.F.R §§ 3.102, 3.156(a), 3.159, 3.326(a) (2009). For the Veteran's increased rating claim, under the VCAA, VA must inform the Veteran of any information and evidence not of record (1) that is necessary to substantiate the claim; (2) that VA will seek to provide; (3) that the Veteran is expected to provide; and (4) must request that the Veteran provide any evidence in his possession that pertains to the claim. Pelegrini v. Principi, 18 Vet. App. 112, 120-21 (2004); see 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103(a); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(b). The United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) has also held that the VCAA notice requirements of 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103(a) and 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(b) apply to all five elements of a service connection claim. Those five elements include: 1) Veteran status; 2) existence of a disability; 3) a connection between the Veteran's service and the disability; 4) degree of disability; and 5) effective date of the disability. Dingess v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 473 (2006). The United States Court for Veterans Appeals (Court) had held that at a minimum, adequate VCAA notice in an increased rating claim required that VA notify the Veteran that, to substantiate such a claim: (1) the Veteran must provide, or ask VA to obtain, medical or lay evidence demonstrating a worsening or increase in severity of the disability and the effect that worsening has on the Veteran's employment and daily life; (2) if the diagnostic code under which the Veteran is rated contains criteria necessary for entitlement to a higher disability rating that would not be satisfied by the Veteran demonstrating a noticeable worsening or increase in severity of the disability and the effect of that worsening has on the Veteran's employment and daily life (such as a specific measurement or test result), the Secretary must provide at least general notice of that requirement to the Veteran; (3) the Veteran must be notified that, should an increase in disability be found, a disability rating will be determined by applying relevant diagnostic codes; and (4) the notice must also provide examples of the types of medical and lay evidence that the Veteran may submit (or ask VA to obtain) that are relevant to establishing entitlement to increased compensation. Vazquez-Flores v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 37 (2008). The Federal Circuit vacated the Court's decision, overturning the requirement that VA provide notice that the claim could be substantiated by evidence of a disability's impact on daily life and that VA provide notice with regard to potential diagnostic code criteria (element 2). Vazquez- Flores v. Shinseki, 580 F.3d 1270 (Fed. Cir. 2009). The generic first, third, and fourth elements of the Court's decision were not disturbed by the Federal Circuit. VA provided VCAA required notice regarding his increased rating claim, in correspondence sent to the Veteran in March 2009. This letter told the Veteran that he could substantiate the claim with evidence that the disability had worsened, notified the Veteran of VA's responsibilities in obtaining information to assist the Veteran in completing his increased rating claim, and identified his duties in obtaining information and evidence to substantiate his claim. An October 2009 letter further provided notice of the type of evidence necessary to establish a disability rating and effective date for the claimed disability under consideration, in accordance with Dingess. The letter told him that he could substantiate the claim with evidence of the impact of his disability on employment, provided examples of evidence that could substantiate the claim, and provided all elements of the notice required by Vazquez-Flores. For claims pending before VA on or after May 30, 2008, 38 C.F.R. 3.159 was amended to eliminate the requirement that VA request that a Veteran submit any evidence in his or her possession that might substantiate the claim. 73 Fed. Reg. 23,353 (Apr. 30, 2008). The Veteran, nonetheless, received this notice in the March 2009 letter. VCAA notice was provided after the initial adjudication of the claim. The timing deficiency was cured by readjudication of the claim in a supplemental statement of the case that was issued after the notice was provided. Mayfield v. Nicholson, 499 F.3d 1317 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Duty to Assist The VCAA also requires VA to make reasonable efforts to help a Veteran obtain evidence necessary to substantiate his claim. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A; 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c), (d). This "duty to assist" contemplates that VA will help a Veteran obtain records relevant to his claim, whether or not the records are in Federal custody, and that VA will provide a medical examination or obtain an opinion when necessary to make a decision on the claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(4). VA has obtained all available records, including service records, and records from VA treatment and examination providers. For the reasons set forth above, the Board finds that VA has complied with the VCAA's notification and assistance requirements. The appeal is thus ready to be considered on the merits. The Merits of the Claim The Veteran was granted entitlement to service connection in a May 1959 rating decision and assigned a 10 percent disability evaluation. In a November 1959 rating decision, the RO continued the Veteran's 10 percent rating from April 10, 1959 to October 12, 1959 and assigned a 50 percent disability rating effective October 13, 1959. In March 1960, the issue of an increased rating for schizophrenia was remanded by the Board to the RO for a social and industrial survey. In an April 1960 rating decision, the RO continued the Veteran's 50 percent disability rating from January 24, 1960. In October 1960, the RO notified the Board it had determined that it had granted the Veteran's benefits in full and "cancelled" the Veteran's appeal. Most recently, in a May 2000 rating decision, the RO granted entitlement to a 100 percent schedular evaluation for the Veteran's service-connected schizophrenia from April 10, 1959 through December 31, 1964. A 70 percent schedular evaluation was assigned from January 1, 1965 through July 25, 1985. Additionally, during this time period, a 100 percent temporary total evaluation under 38 C.F.R. § 4.29 was assigned from July 24, 1965 to December 1, 1966 and from December 8, 1969 to January 31, 1970. A 100 percent schedular evaluation was assigned beginning July 25, 1985. Also, during this time period, the Veteran was granted a total rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) from February 1, 1970 to July 25, 1985. In a June 2000 letter, the Veteran expressed dissatisfaction with this decision. In an August 2001 letter, the RO requested that the Veteran clarify the issues he intended to appeal. In an August 2001 letter, the Veteran stated that the grant of a schedular 100 percent evaluation for his service-connected schizophrenia should have been permanent from April 1959. In its May 2000 rating decision, the RO explained that the Veteran's evaluation was raised to 50 percent, effective October 13, 1959. The Veteran appealed his evaluation and the case was sent to the Board. In March 1960, the Board remanded the case for further development and reconsideration. When the case returned to the RO, the Veteran had again been hospitalized. The hospital report from VAMC West Side Chicago, from January 24, 1960 to March 2, 1960 showed the Veteran had been admitted with auditory hallucinations and paranoid ideation. A subsequent rating raised the service-connected evaluation to 100 percent, but only from the date of hospitalization and did not consider the earlier evaluations which the Veteran had appealed. The RO determined that subsequent rating decisions did not consider the increased evaluations for the Veteran's service- connected schizophrenia and the case was not returned to the Board in light of the March 1960 remand. Therefore, the Board remand is still pending. The RO determined the evidence of record clearly showed that the Veteran was entitled to the 100 percent evaluation rate from his discharge date, which was granted from April 10, 1959 to December 31, 1964. Therefore, based on the above, the Board will consider whether an evaluation in excess of 70 percent from January 1, 1965 to July 23, 1965; January 1, 1966 to December 7, 1969; and from February 1, 1970 to July 25, 1985 is warranted in this matter. Diagnostic Rating Criteria Under 38 C.F.R. § 4.130, Diagnostic Code 9203, the regulations applicable prior to November 7, 1996: A 30 percent evaluation was warranted for symptomatology that resulted in definite social and industrial impairment. A 50 percent evaluation was warranted for symptomatology that resulted in considerable social and industrial impairment. A 70 percent evaluation was warranted where the ability to establish and maintain effective or favorable relationships with people was severely impaired, and the psychoneurotic symptoms were of such severity and persistence that there was severe impairment in the ability to obtain or retain employment. A 100 percent evaluation was warranted (1) when the attitudes of all contacts except the most intimate are so adversely affected as to result in virtual isolation in the community; (2) where there are totally incapacitating psychoneurotic symptoms bordering on gross repudiation of reality with disturbed thought or behavioral processes associated with almost all daily activities such as fantasy, confusion, panic, and explosions of aggressive energy resulting in profound retreat from mature behavior; or (3) where the Veteran is demonstrably unable to obtain or retain employment. The term "definite" is to be construed to mean "distinct, unambiguous, and moderately large in degree, more than moderate but less than rather large." VAOPGCPREC 9-93; 38 U.S.C.A. § 7104(c) (West 1991). In Hood v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 301 (1993), the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) stated that the term "considerable" was declared as meaning "rather large in extent or degree." The Board notes that each of the three criteria for a 100 percent rating under Diagnostic Code 9203 is an independent basis for granting a 100 percent rating. See Johnson v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 95 (1994). Increased Rating Criteria Disability evaluations are determined by evaluating the extent to which a Veteran's service-connected disability adversely affects his ability to function under the ordinary conditions of daily life, including employment, by comparing his symptomatology with the criteria set forth in the Schedule for Rating Disabilities. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. § 4.1. Separate diagnostic codes identify various disabilities and the criteria for specific ratings. If two disability evaluations are potentially applicable, the higher evaluation will be assigned if the disability picture more nearly approximates the criteria required for that evaluation. Otherwise, the lower rating will be assigned. 38 C.F.R. § 4.1. After careful consideration of the evidence, any reasonable doubt remaining will be resolved in favor of the Veteran. 38 C.F.R. § 4.3. While the Veteran's entire history is reviewed when assigning a disability evaluation, 38 C.F.R. § 4.1, see Schafrath v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 589, 594 (1991), where service connection has already been established, and an increase in the disability rating is at issue, it is the present level of disability that is of primary concern. Francisco v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 55 (1994). A Veteran may experience multiple distinct degrees of disability that might result in different levels of compensation from the time the increased rating claim was filed until a final decision is made. Hart v. Mansfield, 21 Vet. App 505 (2007). The analysis in the following decision is therefore undertaken with consideration of the possibility that different ratings may be warranted for different time periods. In the evaluation of service-connected disabilities, the entire recorded history, including medical and industrial history, is considered so that a report of a rating examination, and the evidence as a whole, may yield a current rating which accurately reflects all elements of disability, including the effects on ordinary activity. 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.1, 4.2, 4.10, 4.41. The Board must determine whether there is any other basis upon which an increased evaluation may be assignable. In this regard, except as otherwise provided in the rating schedule, all disabilities, including those arising from a single disease entity, are to be rated separately, unless the conditions constitute the same disability or the same manifestation. 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.14, 4.25; Esteban v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 259 (1994). The critical inquiry in making such a determination is whether any of the symptomatology is duplicative of or overlapping; the Court has held that the Veteran is entitled to a combined rating where the symptomatology is distinct and separate. Esteban, at 262 (1994). The Merits of the Claim For the period January 1, 1965 to July 23, 1965: In October 1964, the Veteran underwent a VA examination and reported that since his last examination in October 1963, he had not been hospitalized due to any mental disorders. He was seeing a physician weekly in the mental hygiene clinic, however, it was discontinued as of April 1964. He reported that he was not being treated by any private doctors, psychiatrists or neurologists for any nervous or mental disorders. The Veteran stated he was looking for work, although he had yet to secure employment. Upon physical examination, the examiner noted the Veteran was neat, cooperative and intelligent. He denied any periods of confusion. His stream of speech was spontaneous, relevant and coherent, with some flattening of affect. He was oriented in all three spheres. He stated that he heard voices in the past, but he had not heard any since April 1964. He stated that he would like to get a job and had made several applications and passed examinations with the Civil Service and other agencies. He stated he had been depressed on occasion during the past six years, and attempted suicide twice, but currently denied any suicidal or homicidal ideas. The examiner diagnosed the Veteran with schizophrenic reaction, paranoid type, in partial remission. In an August 1965 VA admission summary, the examiner noted the Veteran reported he had been unemployed since December 1964. During the past four months, the Veteran stated "images like people would go right through him" at times and he also experienced offensive odors at times such as stale grease. He claimed at various period he heard all types of voices in reference to sexual relations and civil rights. Sometimes he had thoughts of being an almighty power. He believed he needed treatment and was a voluntary patient at the County Hospital during the latter part of July. He was transferred to a State hospital prior to his admission at VA. The examiner diagnosed the Veteran with schizophrenic reaction, paranoid type, chronic, moderate, manifested by auditory, visual, and olfactory hallucinations with some delusions of grandeur and with episodes of depression and two suicide attempts. Analysis For the period January 1, 1965 to July 23, 1965, the medical records associated with the above-referenced time period indicate that the Veteran was demonstrably unable to obtain or retain employment. Under Diagnostic Code 9203, a 100 percent evaluation is warranted (1) when the attitudes of all contacts except the most intimate are so adversely affected as to result in virtual isolation in the community; (2) where there are totally incapacitating psychoneurotic symptoms bordering on gross repudiation of reality with disturbed thought or behavioral processes associated with almost all daily activities such as fantasy, confusion, panic, and explosions of aggressive energy resulting in profound retreat from mature behavior; or (3) where the Veteran is demonstrably unable to obtain or retain employment. Just prior to this above-reference time period, in his October 1964 VA examination, the Veteran reported that he was unable to secure employment. The examiner further noted the Veteran's paranoid schizophrenia was only in partial remission. Additionally, an August 1965 VA hospital admission summary noted that for approximately four months prior to his admission (i.e., at least as early as April/May 1965), the Veteran reported "images" passing through his body, hearing voices, and believing at times that he was an "almighty power." Here, the Veteran was not only unable to obtain employment, but an August 1965 VA admission summary indicated a relapse in the severity of the Veteran's paranoid schizophrenic symptoms that began many months prior to his hospitalization. At the time of admission, the Veteran was hallucinating and experiencing totally incapacitating psychoneurotic symptoms. The Board notes that each of the three criteria for a 100 percent rating under Diagnostic Code 9203 is an independent basis for granting a 100 percent rating. See Johnson v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 95 (1994). In this matter, the Veteran was not only experiencing schizophrenic symptoms, but was unable to obtain or secure employment. Therefore, resolving all doubt in favor of the Veteran, a 100 percent disability evaluation is assigned for the period beginning January 1, 1965 to July 23, 1965. For the period January 1, 1966 to December 7, 1969: For the period beginning January 1, 1966 to December 7, 1969, a 70 percent rating was assigned for service-connected paranoid schizophrenia. The Veteran asserts that a 100 percent evaluation is warranted for this time period. In a January 3, 1966 VA trial visit summary progress note, the examiner stated the Veteran was in good contact mentally and quite alert with no signs of depression. The Veteran was committed at the time of the examination and being placed on trial visits. He was diagnosed with chronic paranoid schizophrenia. In a letter submitted by the Veteran in March 1966, he reported that he obtained gainful employment and began working December 6, 1965. In a June 1966 VA discharge summary, the Veteran was diagnosed with chronic, moderate schizophrenic reaction, paranoid type, previously manifested by auditory, visual, and olfactory hallucinations, with some delusions of grandeur and episodes of depression, with a history of two suicidal attempts in 1961, now in partial remission. The examiner opined the level of impairment was moderate and the predisposition was chronic. The examiner noted the Veteran was alert, very neat, and courteous. In October 1966, the Veteran underwent a VA examination and was diagnosed with chronic, moderate schizophrenic reaction paranoid type, manifested by delusions of grandeur and persecution. The Veteran reported that he worked since December 1965 as a military pay clerk. The examiner noted the Veteran had difficulty in getting along with people which was mostly on a paranoid basis and that his job was affected by his delusional attitude and his delusions particularly of being superior in his work. He also reported that people were trying to isolate him. In December 1967, the Veteran was afforded a VA examination. The examiner noted the Veteran was working as a pay clerk at Oakland Army base. The Veteran found it difficult to say how much sick leave he had taken in the past year, apparently about a week because of his nervous condition. He pointed out that on one occasion it was suggested by his supervisor that he take time off and check with his psychiatrist. The examiner noted the Veteran was casually dressed with closely bitten fingernails. His affect seemed to be somewhat flattened. His conversation at time was rambling and difficult to follow. Concentration seemed to be somewhat impaired. He reported that he was not "too depressed." He said he considered suicide in 1963 and attempted suicide twice, cutting his wrists in 1963 and taking "acid" in 1964. He had auditory hallucinations in the past, and apparently still had them at times, they seemed to be "critical and deceiving." He thought the medication he was taking was of some help. Judgment was fair and insight was hard to measure. The examiner diagnosed the Veteran with a schizophrenic reaction, undifferentiated type, in only partial remission, manifested by flatness of affect, ideas of reference, auditory-hallucinatory experiences, some depression, difficulty concentrating at times, a general tendency to be withdrawn, and rambling speech. In a letter submitted by the Veteran in December 1969, he stated it had become necessary for him to temporarily leave his job due to his service-connected disability, effective September 26, 1969. The Veteran then reported that on December 6, 1969, he entered VA for inpatient treatment, and resigned his employment after working for four years, effective November 27, 1969. A January 1970 VA hospital discharge summary indicated the Veteran had a diagnosis of paranoid type schizophrenia, in remission, previously manifested by auditory hallucinations, restlessness, nervousness, paranoid ideations, blunt affect, mild depression and lack of insight. He had the inability to cope with life's situations and discontinuation of medication. The examiner stated the Veteran was admitted on December 8, 1969 and discharged on January 19, 1970. The examiner noted that the Veteran may return to prehospital activities immediately, however gainful employment for an extended period was doubtful as it was likely he would repeat his previous pattern of discontinuing his medication and suffer a relapse of his neuropsychiatric diagnosis. Analysis The Board finds that under the rating criteria for Diagnostic Code 9203 prior to November 7, 1996, the Veteran's disability does not more nearly approximate the criteria for a 100 percent rating from January 1, 1966 to December 7, 1969. The Veteran secured gainful employment and began working in December 1965. He continued working in the same position for an approximately four year period, not resigning until November 7, 1969. It was not until December 1969 that the Veteran become an inpatient at VA facility. Here, the Board finds that the record as a whole does not show the criteria necessary for a 100 percent disability evaluation. The Veteran was working, there is no evidence of virtual isolation in the community, and no incidents of totally incapacitating psychoneurotic symptoms bordering on gross repudiation of reality with disturbed thought or behavioral processes associated with almost all daily activities such as fantasy, confusion, panic, and explosions of aggressive energy resulting in profound retreat from mature behavior. In a June 1966 VA discharge summary, the examiner opined the Veteran's level of impairment was determined to be moderate. In December 1967, the VA examiner diagnosed the Veteran with a schizophrenic reaction, undifferentiated type, in partial remission. However, the Veteran continued to be gainfully employed. The record thus approximates findings consistent with a 70 percent disability evaluation, where the ability to establish and maintain effective or favorable relationships with people was severely impaired, and the psychoneurotic symptoms were of such severity and persistence that there was severe impairment in the ability to obtain or retain employment. 38 C.F.R. § 4.130, Diagnostic Code 9203. Therefore, for the period of January 1, 966 to December 7, 1969, the criteria for a disability evaluation of 100 percent is denied. For the period February 1, 1970 to July 25, 1985: In a January 1972 VA clinical record, the examiner stated the Veteran was given a one year sick leave from his employment. According to the personnel officer, the Veteran's performance had totally deteriorated. The examiner stated this was not surprising to him, as he was aware of the profound pathology of the Veteran. The examiner opined the Veteran remained suspicious, truly guarded, and additionally, one sensed a feeling of despair. The examiner stated that the Veteran's main ambition in life, to be an accountant, had finally been "destroyed" together with desires for a more fulfilling personal life. In January 1973, the Veteran was afforded a VA examination. The examiner noted the Veteran was casually dressed, but was a tense, and rather guarded individual. The Veteran reported he was unemployed, and previously worked for the State of California for approximately one year in 1970. He was restless at times, frequently paced the floor, and had occasional temper outbursts. He was oriented as to time, person, and place. His speech was generally coherent and relevant. Spontaneity was diminished and his affect seemed to be suppressed, flattened and labile on occasions. The Veteran was depressed at times and had suicidal ideas, although he had apparently never attempted suicide. He continued to have some auditory hallucinatory experiences, which were somewhat critical of him. His insight was limited and judgment was variable. The examiner stated the Veteran was leading an essentially dependent-type existence, getting along in a rather marginal- type way. His general situation seemed to remain about as it had been, with symptomatology remaining essentially unchanged. The examiner diagnosed schizophrenic reaction, undifferentiated type, in only partial remission. In a September 1974 VA counseling record, the counselor stated the Veteran's service-connected disability prevented him from working on the jobs that he was trained for in the business area. The counselor noted the Veteran was subject to over-reaction to criticism, undue suspicion of others, over-sensitivity to normal pressures, and fits of unproductive depression. These reactions were very substantial impediments to any job requiring some contact with people, employers, employees, or customers. His advancing age ruled out the appropriateness of manual labor. The counselor stated that the Veteran's poor work record due to his service-connected disability, his age, his minority group status, and the nature of his service-connected disability were all cause for employer bias against the Veteran. Analysis The Veteran resigned his employment, effective November 27, 1969, and during the time frame of February 1, 1970 to July 25, 1985, the Veteran was granted a total rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU). VA medical treatment and counseling records associated with the record indicate the Veteran was leading an essentially dependent-type existence, getting along rather marginally. (See January 1973 VA examination). The medical records further indicate that the Veteran, although apparently sporadically employed during this time frame, was demonstrably unable to obtain or retain employment. Again, a 100 percent evaluation is warranted (1) when the attitudes of all contacts except the most intimate are so adversely affected as to result in virtual isolation in the community; (2) where there are totally incapacitating psychoneurotic symptoms bordering on gross repudiation of reality with disturbed thought or behavioral processes associated with almost all daily activities such as fantasy, confusion, panic, and explosions of aggressive energy resulting in profound retreat from mature behavior; or (3) where the Veteran is demonstrably unable to obtain or retain employment. After carefully reviewing the record, the Board finds that the evidence supports a 100 percent disability rating for the Veteran's schizophrenia for the time frame beginning February 1, 1970 to July 25, 1985. The evidence of record confirms he was unable to obtain or retain employment due to his service- connected schizophrenia during this time frame. And on this basis, alone, a 100 percent disability rating is warranted. See Johnson v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 95, 97-99 (1994). Extra-Schedular Notwithstanding the above discussion, ratings in excess of the assigned schedular evaluations for the Veteran's above- noted disability may be granted when it is demonstrated that the particular disabilities present such an exceptional or unusual disability picture with such related factors as marked interference with employment or frequent periods of hospitalization as to render impractical the application of the regular schedular standards. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.321(b)(1). There is no evidence that the Veteran's service-connected disability addressed above has presented such an unusual or exceptional disability picture at any time as to require consideration of an extraschedular evaluation pursuant to the provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 3.321(b). The schedular rating criteria are designed to compensate for average impairments in earning capacity resulting from service-connected disability in civil occupations. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1155. "Generally, the degrees of disability specified [in the rating schedule] are considered adequate to compensate for considerable loss of working time from exacerbations or illnesses proportionate to the severity of the several grades of disability." 38 C.F.R. § 4.1. There is also no evidence that the schedular evaluation in this case is inadequate. As discussed above, there are higher ratings for the Veteran's disability, but the required manifestations have not been shown in this case. The Board further finds that no evidence has been presented suggesting an exceptional disability picture in this case. ORDER For the period January 1, 1965 to July 23, 1965, the criteria for a disability evaluation of 100 percent for paranoid schizophrenia is granted. For the period January 1, 1966 to December 7, 1969, the criteria for a disability evaluation in excess of 70 percent for paranoid schizophrenia is denied. For the period February 1, 1970 to July 25, 1985, the criteria for a disability evaluation of 100 percent for paranoid schizophrenia is granted. ____________________________________________ CHERYL L. MASON Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Department of Veterans Affairs