Citation Nr: 18148363 Decision Date: 11/07/18 Archive Date: 11/07/18 DOCKET NO. 15-45 927 DATE: November 7, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to an effective date earlier than December 17, 2013 for the grant of service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is denied. FINDING OF FACT The record does not contain any communication or claim for service connection for PTSD after the last denial for service connection in June 1998, or prior to his December 17, 2013, claim for service connection for PTSD. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for establishing entitlement to an effective date earlier than December 17, 2013 for the grant of service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 5110 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400 (2018). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty with the United States Air Force from December 1968 to December 1971 and from December 1971 to September 1973. Duty to Assist and to Notify VA is required to notify a claimant of what information or evidence is necessary to substantiate the claim; what subset of the necessary information or evidence, if any, the claimant is to provide; and what subset of the necessary information or evidence, if any, the VA will attempt to obtain. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(b) (2018). Copies of compliant VCAA notices were located in the claim’s file. VA’s duty to assist includes providing a thorough and contemporaneous medical examination, especially where it is necessary to determine the current level of a disability. Peters v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 540, 542 (1994). In this case, neither the Veteran nor his representative has raised any issues with the duty to notify or duty to assist. See Scott v McDonald, 789 F.3d 1375, 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (holding that “the Board’s obligation to read filings in a liberal manner does not require the Board . . . to search the record and address procedural arguments when the veteran fails to raise them before the Board.”); Dickens v. McDonald, 814 F.3d 1359, 1361 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (applying Scott to duty to assist argument). Thus, upon careful review of the file, the Board finds that all necessary development has been accomplished, and therefore appellate review may proceed without prejudice to the Veteran. See Bernard v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 384 (1993). Earlier Effective Dates - Generally In general, the effective date of an award of compensation and rating 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 entitlement arose, whichever is the later. 38 U.S.C. § 5110 (a) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400 (2018). When evidence demonstrates that a factually ascertainable increase in disability occurred within the one-year period preceding the date of receipt of a claim for increased compensation, the effective date of the award shall be the earliest date as of which it is ascertainable that an increase in disability had occurred, if application is received within one year from that date. 38 U.S.C. § 5110 (b)(2) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400 (o)(2) (2018); Harper v. Brown, 10 Vet. App. 125 (1997). As applicable in this appeal, a “claim” is defined broadly to include a formal or informal communication in writing requesting a determination of entitlement or evidencing a belief in entitlement to a benefit. 38 C.F.R. § 3.1 (p). Any communication indicating an intent to apply for a benefit under the laws administered by VA may be considered an informal claim provided it identifies, but not necessarily with specificity, the benefit sought. 38 C.F.R. § 3.155(a). 1. Entitlement to an effective date earlier than December 17, 2013 for the grant of service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) The Regional Office (RO) has assigned an effective date of December 17, 2013, for the award of service connection for PTSD, which is based upon the date of receipt of the Veteran’s claim to reopen this claim. He seeks the assignment of an earlier effective date, specifically May 1997, the date of initial diagnosis by his private physician. The effective date for an award of disability compensation based on an original claim for direct service connection is the date of receipt of the claim or the date entitlement arose, whichever is later. 38 U.S.C. § 5110 (b)(1) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400 (b)(2)(i) (2018). If the grant is based on a claim which has been finally denied and subsequently reopened by the receipt of new and material evidence, the effective date is the date of receipt of the new claim, or the date entitlement arose, whichever is later. 38 U.S.C. § 5110 (a) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400 (q), (r) (2018). A decision becomes final if an appeal is not timely perfected. 38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.104 (a), 3.160(d), 20.200, 20.302, 20.1103 (2018). Previous determinations that are final will be accepted as correct in the absence of a collateral attack showing the decision involved clear and unmistakable error (CUE). 38 C.F.R. § 3.105 (a) (2018). The Board notes that the issue of CUE is not before the Board. Here, the Veteran’s effective date is based upon the receipt, in December 17, 2013, of his claim to reopen a previously denied claim for service connection of PTSD. Prior to that, his most recent claim for service connection for PTSD was denied in a June 1998 rating decision. The basis for the October 1997 and June 1998 RO denials was a lack of specific information to verify the claimed stressors. The Veteran did not file a substantive appeal, and the rating decisions are now final. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1103 (2018). When service connection is granted after reopening a claim, the Board is precluded from reaching back to the date of the original claim or previous claims as possible effective dates. Sears v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 244, 248 (2002). The question remaining is whether any claims were received prior to December 2013, but after the June 1998. The record does not show or suggest that a formal claim was received during the stated time period, and the Veteran has made no such allegation. Further, there are no communications after the June 1998 Rating decision that could be construed as an informal claim for service connection. 38 C.F.R. § 3.155. Indeed, the only communication memorialized in the file since the June 1998 Rating Decision consists of correspondence appointing the Veteran’s personal representative. The RO’s grant of service connection for PTSD was based on application of a relaxed evidentiary rule for adjudicating PTSD claims promulgated in July 2010. Thus, the award was not based on the addition of service department records, so the provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(c) are not applicable. Therefore, the Board cannot find any basis for an earlier effective date or any basis to find that the earlier decision had not become final. Accordingly, this appeal for an earlier effective date must be denied. TANYA SMITH Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD N. Whitaker, Associate Counsel