Citation Nr: 18143124 Decision Date: 10/18/18 Archive Date: 10/17/18 DOCKET NO. 15-04 078A DATE: October 18, 2018 ORDER An effective date prior to March 9, 2001, for the grant of service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is denied. An effective date prior to March 9, 2001, for the award of Dependents’ Educational Assistance (DEA) benefits under 38 U.S.C. Chapter 35 is denied. REMANDED Service connection for myocardial infarction and coronary artery disease is remanded. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran served on active duty from March 1969 to April 1969. 2. The claim giving rise to the grant of service connection for PTSD was received on March 9, 2001; entitlement arose prior to that date. 3. In January 2012, the Veteran was granted DEA benefits effective March 9, 2001, upon the finding that he was found permanently and totally disabled from that date; there is no evidence that the Veteran ever sought such benefits, had permanent total service-connected disability, or was otherwise eligible for DEA benefits prior to such date. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for establishing an effective date prior to March 9, 2001, for the grant of service connection for PTSD have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 5107 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.400 (2017). 2. The criteria for establishing an effective date prior to March 9, 2001, for the award of DEA benefits have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 3510 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.807(a) (2017). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Earlier Effective Dates The Veteran is seeking an earlier effective date than March 9, 2001, for the awards of service connection for PTSD and DEA benefits. PTSD The assignment of effective dates is governed by 38 U.S.C. § 5110 and 38 C.F.R. § 3.400. If a claim is received within one year of a veteran’s separation from service, the effective date will be the date of separation from active duty or the date that entitlement arose. Otherwise, the effective date for an award of pension, compensation, or dependency and indemnity compensation based on an original claim, a claim reopened after final disallowance, or a claim for increase, will be the date of receipt of the claim or the date that entitlement arose, whichever is later. See 38 U.S.C. § 5110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.400. Here, the effective date of March 9, 2001, corresponds with the date that the Veteran’s service connection claim was received, more than one year following his separation from service. The evidence establishes that entitlement arose prior to this date, including psychiatric treatment records from the 1970s and lay testimony indicating that the Veteran’s symptoms onset shortly after his exit from service. As the effective date will be the later of the date of the receipt of the claim (March 9, 2001) or the date entitlement arose (with evidence dating to the 1970s), an effective date prior to March 9, 2001, is not warranted, as this corresponds to the date that the Veteran’s claim was received by VA and is the later of the two relevant dates. Briefly, the Board acknowledges that the Veteran submitted service connection claims for “nerves” or a “nervous condition” in May 1979, April 1981, and April 1985. However, the Veteran attributed these symptoms to physical conditions, such as a bilateral leg disorder, rather than a psychiatric one. As such, these are not construed as service connection claims for a psychiatric disorder, such that they do not justify the assignment of an earlier effective date at this time. Instead, March 9, 2001, corresponds with the date of the claim giving rise to the grant of service connection for PTSD, and the appeal is hereby denied. DEA Eligibility to DEA benefits under Chapter 35 are as follows: (1) The veteran was discharged from service under conditions other than dishonorable, or died in service; and (2) the veteran has a permanent total service-connected disability; or (3) a permanent total service-connected disability was in existence at the date of the veteran’s death; or (4) the veteran died as a result of a service-connected disability. 38 U.S.C. § 3510 (West 2014); 38 C.F.R. § 3.807(a) (2016). In January 2012, the Veteran was granted DEA benefits from March 9, 2001, based on the Regional Office’s finding that he became permanently and totally disabled on that date due to his PTSD. As this effective date is directly predicated on a finding that the Veteran had permanent and total disability due to a service-connected disability, it is the earliest possible date he could have established eligibility for DEA benefits on that basis. Thus, the remaining question for consideration is whether there is another basis by which such eligibility could be established prior to March 9, 2001. As the Veteran is still alive, the conditions relating to service-connected death or existence of a permanent total service-connected disability at death do not apply. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.807(a)(3)-(4). The only remaining basis for eligibility requires, as a threshold matter, current active duty, which does not apply to the Veteran. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.807(a)(5). Consequently, there is no other basis upon which any eligibility for DEA benefits could be established in this case, much less eligibility warranting an effective date prior to March 9, 2001. Therefore, the Board finds that March 9, 2001 is the earliest possible effective date for an award of DEA benefits, and an earlier effective date for such benefit is not warranted. Of final note, the Veteran has not raised any other issues, nor have any other issues been reasonably raised by the record, for the Board’s consideration. See Doucette v. Shulkin, 28 Vet. App. 366, 369-370 (2017) (confirming that the Board is not required to address issues unless they are specifically raised by the claimant or reasonably raised by the evidence of record). REASONS FOR REMAND 1. Entitlement to service connection for a myocardial infarction and coronary artery disease is remanded. The Veteran underwent a VA examination for his claimed cardiac disability in December 2013. An opinion obtained in conjunction with that examination adequately addressed whether the Veteran’s cardiac disabilities were proximately due to or the result of his service-connected PTSD, but it did not address whether his cardiac disabilities were aggravated by his service-connected disability. This claim must be remanded in order to obtain that additional opinion. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain an opinion from an appropriate examiner as to the question of whether the Veteran’s currently diagnosed cardiac disabilities are aggravated by his service-connected PTSD. Evan M. Deichert Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD K. Kovarovic, Associate Counsel