Citation Nr: 18147760 Decision Date: 11/06/18 Archive Date: 11/06/18 DOCKET NO. 13-29 368 DATE: November 6, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to a total disability rating based upon individual unemployability (TDIU) is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran meets the schedular criteria for a TDIU. 2. With full consideration of the Veteran’s educational background and occupational experience, the Veteran’s service-connected disabilities prevent him from securing or following a substantially gainful occupation. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for a TDIU due to service-connected disabilities have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 4.16 (2017). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from June 1967 to June 1970. Entitlement to a TDIU Total disability is considered to exist when there is any impairment which is sufficient to render it impossible for the average person to follow a substantially gainful occupation. Total disability may or may not be permanent. 38 C.F.R. § 3.340 (a)(1). TDIU may be assigned when the disabled person is, in the judgment of the rating agency, unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation as a result of service-connected disabilities. The service-connected disabilities, employment history, educational and vocational attainment, and all other factors having a bearing on the issue will be addressed in both instances. 38 C.F.R. § 4.16 (a), (b). TDIU is authorized for any disability or combination of disabilities where the schedular rating is less than total, and the claimant is unable to secure and maintain substantially gainful employment because of the severity of service-connected disabilities. If there is only one such disability, it must be rated as at least 60 percent. If two or more disabilities, at least one must be rated as at least 40 percent disabling, with sufficient additional service-connected disability to bring the combined rating to 70 percent. 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.15, 4.16(a). The Veteran is receipt of an 80 percent rating for PTSD, rated 70 percent disabling; bilateral hearing loss, rated 30 percent disabling; and tinnitus, rated 10 percent disabling. Accordingly, the Veteran meets the schedular criteria for TDIU. The evidence indicates that the Veteran has not worked since July 2007. In June 2012, the Veteran submitted an Application for Increased Compensation Based on Unemployability. The Veteran reported that he was unable to work primarily due to his service-connected PTSD. He stated that he was asked to retire from his previous job in 2007 or risk being fired and lose the funds that his company had contributed to his retirement account. The Veteran reported that his PTSD caused him to frequently argue with co-workers, which occasionally came close to physical violence. He stated that his psychiatric symptoms had increased since he retired and that he believed he was now unemployable. He stated that he had attempted suicide twice since his most recent PTSD evaluation, that his behavior is frequently inappropriate, and that he suffers from memory problems. In support of his claim, the Veteran submitted a May 2013 letter from his treating psychologist, S.H. The psychologist stated that the Veteran’s symptoms of PTSD included traumatic memories, a disrupted sleep cycle, lowered stress tolerance and increased irritability, over arousal symptoms, social isolation and avoidance. The psychologist also stated that during therapy the Veteran consistently noted problems in his past work history related to his lack of stress tolerance, his trouble controlling his anger, and his overall level of emotional reactivity. In November 2013, a narrative report was obtained regarding an employment feasibility decision by VA Vocational Rehabilitation Counselor. The counselor stated that the Veteran’s military training and experienced provided him marketable skills for administrative tasks. The counselor determined that the Veteran had a serious employment handicap and that achievement of a vocational goal was not feasible at that time. The counselor stated that numerous factors such as limited education, limited mobility, COPD, PTSD symptoms, prior alcohol abuse, and multiple prior DUIs made employment acquisition improbable. In May 2016, the Veteran underwent a psychiatric evaluation related to his service-connected PTSD. The examiner opined that the Veteran’s level of occupational and social impairment with regards to his PTSD caused occupational and social impairment with deficiencies in most areas, such as work, school, family relations, judgment, thinking and/or mood. The examiner reported that the Veteran demonstrated symptoms that included: depressed mood; chronic sleep impairment; difficulty in establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships; and difficulty in adapting to stressful circumstances, including work or a worklike setting. When asked to discuss the Veteran’s functional limitation on his employment due to his PTSD, the examiner noted that the Veteran’s condition would cause moderate impairment in productivity and concentration, and moderate impairment with intermittent severe impairment of his ability to interact with co-workers and supervisors. After resolving the benefit of the doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Board finds that the Veteran’s service-connected disabilities render him unable to secure and follow substantial gainful employment. The Board finds probative the opinions provided by the May 2013 psychologist and the May 2016 VA examiner. The evidence indicates that the Veteran suffers from symptoms of lowered stress tolerance, increased irritability, social isolation, mood swings, depressed mood, and impairments in concentration, memory, and social functioning, which would significantly limit his ability to perform even an isolated or unskilled job. The Board notes that the Veteran dropped out of high school in the 11th grade; and, despite earning a GED in 1980, his prior experience has prepared him for jobs that involve working with others. A vocational evaluation stated that his military duties prepared him for administrative duties, and the evidence of record indicates that his job at a manufacturing plant frequently involved interacting with co-workers who caused the Veteran to become irritable and violent. Even if the Veteran were to find a job that fits his education and training, where he could work primarily alone, the May 2016 examiner stated that the Veteran would have moderate, and intermittently severe impairments, interacting with supervisors due to his PTSD symptoms. The Board finds that it is unlikely that the Veteran could obtain and maintain gainful employment, with intermittently severe symptoms of his PTSD affecting him while interacting with his supervisors and any potential co-workers. The Board also notes that a Vocational Rehabilitation Counselor opined that it was improbable that the Veteran would be able to acquire employment based upon his history of skills and his current employment handicaps. While this counselor considered the Veteran’s non-service connected limitations in mobility, COPD, and criminal record due to DUIs, the Board finds that the evidence indicates that Veteran’s education history and limitations caused by his PTSD cause significant employment handicaps on their own. While a January 2013 VA examiner opined that the Veteran was not unemployable due to his PTSD, the Board notes that the rationale provided for this opinion was that the Veteran had co-morbid psychiatric diagnoses of depressive disorder and alcohol abuse that were factors in whether he was unemployable due to his mental health limitations. Further, this examiner argued that as documentary evidence had not been provided that the Veteran was asked by his former employer to resign that it was unclear that his exit from the workforce was involuntary. The Board notes that the Veteran is competent to report a discussion with his supervisor, and finds that statements from his treating psychologist and prior co-workers, K.S. and S.B.,support the Veteran’s reports regarding his retirement in 2007. Based upon the foregoing, the Board resolves the benefit of the doubt in favor of the Veteran and finds that the requirements for a schedular TDIU are met; accordingly, the claim for a TDIU is granted. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 4.16 (2017). K. PARAKKAL Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD P.M. Johnson, Counsel