Citation Nr: 20002131 Decision Date: 01/09/20 Archive Date: 01/09/20 DOCKET NO. 19-23 521 DATE: January 9, 2020 ORDER Entitlement to an effective date prior to January 30, 2014 for the award of service connection for migraine headache is denied. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 30 percent for migraine headaches is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran did not submit a claim, either formal or informal, for service connection for the award of service connection for migraine headaches until January 30, 2014. 2. The Veteran’s migraine headaches are manifested by characteristic prostrating attacks, without severe economic inadaptability. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Entitlement to an effective date prior to January 30, 2014, for the grant of service connection for a migraine disability, is not warranted. 38 U.S.C. §§ 5101, 5110, 7104; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.1(p), 3.400. 2. The criteria for an initial rating in excess of 30 percent for migraine headaches have not been meet. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.7, 4.124a, Diagnostic Code 8100. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran had active service from October 2010 to February 2011. 1. Entitlement to an effective date prior to January 30, 2014 for the award of service connection for migraine headaches. The Veteran’s migraine disability claim arises from his disagreement with the effective date following the grant of service connection. The Veteran argues that an earlier effective date is warranted for his migraine disability. The basic facts are not in dispute. As the RO noted, the Veteran’s initial application for service connection for migraine headaches was filed with VA on January 30, 2014, and indeed, the Veteran does not contend otherwise. Unless specifically provided otherwise in the statute, the effective date of an award based on an original claim for compensation benefits shall be the date of receipt of the claim or the date entitlement arose, whichever is later. 38 U.S.C. § 5110(a); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400. The effective date of an award of disability compensation shall be the day following separation from service or the date entitlement arose if the claim is received within one year of separation, otherwise the date of claim or the date entitlement arose, whichever is later. 38 U.S.C. § 5110(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400(b)(2). A specific claim in the form prescribed by the Secretary must be filed in order for benefits to be paid or furnished to any individual under the laws administered by VA. 38 U.S.C. § 5101(a); 38 C.F.R. § 3.151(a). The term “claim” or “application” means 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 or action indicating an intent to apply for one or more benefits under the laws administered by VA, from a Veteran or his representative, may be considered an informal claim. Such informal claim must identify the benefit sought. Upon receipt of an informal claim, if a formal claim has not been filed, an application form will be forwarded to the claimant for execution. If received within one year from the date it was sent to the Veteran, it will be considered filed as of the date of receipt of the informal claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.155. Here, the RO granted service connection and a 30 percent evaluation effective the date the Veteran’s original claim of service connection for migraine disability was filed with VA. An effective date of an award of service connection is not based on the earliest medical evidence showing a causal connection, but on the date that the application upon which service connection was eventually awarded was filed with VA. Lalonde v. West, 12 Vet. App. 377, 382 (1999). Because the Veteran did not file a formal or informal application for service connection prior to January 30, 2014, VA is precluded, as a matter of law, from granting an effective date prior to January 30, 2014, for service connection for migraine disability. As such, this appeal must be denied because the RO has already assigned the earliest possible effective date provided by law. 2. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 30 percent for migraine headaches. The Veteran’s headaches are evaluated under Diagnostic Code (DC) 8100, which provides a 10 percent disability evaluation is warranted for characteristic prostrating attacks averaging one in 2 months over the last several months. A 30 percent disability rating is assigned for migraine headaches with characteristic prostrating attacks occurring on an average of once a month over the last several months. A 50 percent rating is assigned for migraines with very frequent completely prostrating and prolonged attacks productive of severe economic inadaptability. In a September 2016 VA examination, the Veteran reported headaches that were painful, pulsating, and throbbing, with pain on one side of his head causing sensitivity to light, sound and changes in vision about three times a week. The headaches require medication. He reported prostrating headaches more frequent than once per month that did not impact his ability to work. The Veteran is currently in receipt of a 30 percent rating for his headache disability. The Board finds that the evidence of record does not support a rating in excess of 30 percent. While the Veteran has described painful headaches, he has not reported that his headaches are very frequent completely prostrating and prolonged attacks productive of severe economic inadaptability. Additionally, the VA examiner did not opine that the Veteran’s headaches cause severe economic inadaptability nor does a review of the Veteran’s VA treatment records support such finding. In light of the foregoing, the Board finds that the preponderance of the evidence is against entitlement to a higher initial rating for headaches. Thus, the claim must be denied. STEVEN D. REISS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board T. Booker, Associate Counsel The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential, and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.