Citation Nr: 18152186 Decision Date: 11/21/18 Archive Date: 11/21/18 DOCKET NO. 16-42 561 DATE: November 21, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities (TDIU) is granted. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran is service-connected for one disability, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), rated at 70 percent, and it has prevented him from obtaining and maintaining substantially gainful employment. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to a TDIU have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1155 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.340, 3.341, 4.16 (2018). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active military service from June 1967 to June 1970. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2015 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Hartford Regional Office (RO) in Newington, Connecticut. Entitlement to a TDIU The Veteran has reported that his service-connected PTSD has prevented him from securing or following any substantial gainful occupation. The Veteran’s combined rating has been at least 70 percent with his service-connected PTSD rated at 70 percent. Therefore, the Board finds that the Veteran has met the schedular criteria for assignment of a TDIU. In addition, the evidence of record reflects that the Veteran has been unable to secure and follow any substantially gainful employment due to his service-connected PTSD. In this regard, the Veteran reported a variable work history, to include machine setup and plating line operator. He indicated that he became too disabled to work in 1995 or 1996, at which time his service-connected PTSD prevented him from obtaining and maintaining any form of gainful employment consistent with his high school education and limited college-level training. Specifically, the Veteran stated that, over a period of forty-five years, he worked many different jobs but not for a long time. He reported that, in the 1970s, men at his job reminded him of the servicemen who “took his manhood” and after sitting next to men at work, he would have flashbacks, nightmares, and suicidal thoughts. Further, he quit jobs that required employees to wear uniforms because it reminded him of the servicemen that assaulted him during service. In 1997, the Veteran participated in a VA Incentive Therapy program functioning as a kitchen clean-up person. The purpose of this assignment was to help the Veteran maintain constructive use of his time, maintain vocational motivation, and enhance his self-esteem. The Veteran successfully completed the program prior to his discharge. However, in a March 1999 statement, the Veteran’s VA medical provider concluded that the Veteran was unable to work, in part, due to depression. The Veteran was afforded VA psychiatric examinations in March 2015 and September 2017. He reported that the longest job he held was setting up machines for nine years. He acknowledged that he had difficulty maintaining regular attendance due to feeling “uncomfortable” with other men at his job and using the men’s room. He added that those type of experiences made him recall his military sexual trauma (MST). He described becoming upset when he suspected others were laughing at him and remarked ‘“I couldn’t shake it. I couldn’t do my work.”’ He recalled that he was fired from one position due to poor work performance and because he became angry, irritable, and used profanity. He reported that he was fired from another position because he was frequently absent and he would leave work to avoid becoming aggressive when he had flashbacks of his MST. The examiner noted that the Veteran was “suspicious” of other males and that he had difficulty interacting with others, particularly when reminded of his MST; and that the Veteran was reluctant to seek work as he continued to have trauma-related symptoms of reexperiencing and other PTSD-like symptoms which would cause him a rapid increase of emotional distress. Although the Veteran reported that physical pain prohibited him from obtaining competitive employment and that his PTSD symptoms were being successfully managed, he also endorsed symptoms of depressed mood, anxiety, suspiciousness, panic attacks, chronic sleep impairment, mild memory loss, impaired speech, impaired judgment, disturbances of motivation and mood, difficulty in establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships, difficulty in adapting to stressful circumstances, inability to establish and maintain effective relationships, impaired impulse control, and intermittent inability to perform activities of daily living. Based on the subjective report of the Veteran and the objective findings in the VA examination reports and additional medical evidence of record, the Board finds that the Veteran’s service-connected PTSD significantly impacts his ability to function in an occupational setting. In this regard, the Board finds that no significant improvement was observed in 1997 and at the March 2015 and September 2017 VA examinations. Since the 1970s, the Veteran’s job history has been negatively impacted by trauma-related anger, irritability, feelings of discomfort, emotional distress, reexperiencing, aggression, and his inability to interact with other men at work. In addition, his service-connected PTSD was productive of isolative and avoidant behaviors, difficulty in adapting to stressful circumstances, impaired impulse control, impaired judgment, and inability to establish and maintain effective relationships. Further, a VA medical provider linked the Veteran’s inability to work to depression. In light of the Veteran’s employment history and the functional limitations described above, the Board finds that he is unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation in accordance with his background and education level as a result of his service-connected PTSD. Accordingly, resolving reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Board finds that entitlement to TDIU is warranted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b) (2012); Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). Kristin Haddock Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD D. Ware, Associate Counsel