Citation Nr: 18144223 Decision Date: 10/24/18 Archive Date: 10/24/18 DOCKET NO. 16-22 303 DATE: October 24, 2018 ORDER The claim for entitlement to a total disability rating due to individual unemployability resulting from service-connected disability (TDIU) from August 12, 2010 to April 29, 2013 is granted. FINDING OF FACT From August 12, 2010 to April 29, 2013, the Veteran’s service-connected disabilities precluded him from performing gainful employment for which his education and occupational experience otherwise qualified him. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for a TDIU are met from August 12, 2010 to April 29, 2013. 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.16, 4.25. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from November 1965 to November 1967. This case comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2013 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). 1. Entitlement to a TDIU prior to April 30, 2013. The Veteran contends that he is unemployable due to service-connected disabilities, specifically posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), residuals of prostate cancer, and ischemic heart disease. VA will grant a TDIU when the evidence shows that the Veteran is precluded due to his service-connected disabilities from obtaining or maintaining “substantially gainful employment” consistent with his education and occupational experience. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.340, 3.341, 4.16; VAOPGCPREC 75-91; 57 Fed. Reg. 2317 (1992). As a preliminary matter, the Board finds that the question of whether a TDIU is warranted during the period dating from April 30, 2013 is moot. In a November 2013 rating decision, the Veteran was assigned a 100 percent total schedular rating for ischemic heart disease effective April 30, 2013. At that time, the Veteran was also awarded special monthly compensation (SMC) under 38 U.S.C. § 1114(s) for statutory housebound status also effective from April 30, 2013. Typically, the award of a total schedular rating renders the need for TDIU moot, as a TDIU is meant to provide a total rating for unemployability when the Veteran’s schedular rating is less than total. However, the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) has identified a situation where a TDIU is warranted even when the Veteran is in receipt of a total schedular rating. In Bradley v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 280, 294 (2008), the Court determined that a separate TDIU rating predicated on one disability (although perhaps not ratable at the schedular 100 percent level) when considered together with another disability or disabilities separately rated at 60 percent or more could warrant SMC under 38 U.S.C. § 1114(s). In this case, the Veteran is already in receipt of SMC for housebound status based on a 100 percent schedular rating for ischemic heart disease. Therefore, the claim for a TDIU from April 30, 2013 onward is moot; however, the issue of whether a TDIU is warranted during the period prior to April 30, 2013 remains on appeal. The Veteran meets the schedular criteria for an award of TDIU from August 12, 2010 to April 29, 2013; during this period he was service-connected for multiple disabilities (including PTSD and ischemic heart disease) with a combined evaluation for compensation of 80 percent. 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a) (providing that the schedular criteria are met if there are two or more service-connected disabilities with one disability ratable at 40 percent or more and sufficient additional disability to bring the combined rating to 70 percent or more); 38 C.F.R. § 4.25, Table I (Combined Ratings Table). After review of the evidence, the Board resolves any doubt in the Veteran’s favor and finds that he was unemployable due to his service-connected disabilities during the period from August 12, 2010 to April 29, 2013. The record establishes that the Veteran last held substantially gainful employment in November 1976 when he worked as a diesel mechanic. Medical records dating from the 1970s and 1980s show that the Veteran incurred a work-related low back injury in November 1976 which required multiple surgeries. The Veteran was never able to return to fulltime work after November 1976. Information received from the Veteran shows that he completed high school, but has no other relevant education or training, and has only worked as a mechanic and truck driver. Despite the incurrence of a severe nonservice-connected low back injury in 1976, the evidence establishes that the Veteran was unemployable due to service-connected disabilities from August 12, 2010 to April 29, 2013. During this period, the Veteran’s VA treatment records document PTSD-symptoms including depression, poor sleep with nightmares, anxiety, and a need to isolate from other people. The Veteran also reported experiencing aggression towards other people stemming from PTSD. Upon VA examinations in October 2010 and February 2012, the Veteran’s PTSD was found to cause deficiencies in all areas, including employment. The February 2012 VA examiner also found that the “Veteran’s PTSD symptoms limit his ability to work in a crowded, busy and noisy environment.” The Board finds these limitations are not conducive to employment consistent with the Veteran’s educational level and prior work history as a mechanic and truck driver. The Board has considered the opinion of a February 2012 VA examiner that the Veteran is not considered incapable of maintaining gainful employment due to service-connected disabilities. However, this medical opinion is of reduced probative value as it is not accompanied by any rationale and the examiner does not appear to have considered the Veteran’s work history, education, or the type of occupational impairment associated with the service-connected PTSD. The Board therefore finds that the Veteran had severe functional impairment due to service-connected disabilities during the period from August 12, 2010 to April 29, 2013. The Board finds that the evidence is at least in equipoise regarding the question of unemployability during this period and will resolve reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran and grant the claim. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107; Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). M. H. HAWLEY Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD M. Riley, Counsel