Citation Nr: 21070324 Decision Date: 11/23/21 Archive Date: 11/23/21 DOCKET NO. 12-01 849 DATE: November 23, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to a rating of 70 percent, but no higher, for an acquired psychiatric disability for the period prior to January 1, 2013, is granted. Entitlement to a rating of 100 percent for an acquired psychiatric disability beginning January 1, 2013, is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Prior to January 1, 2013, the Veteran's acquired psychiatric disability has resulted in occupational and social impairment, with deficiencies in most areas, such as work, school, family relations, judgment, thinking, or mood, but has not resulted in total occupational and social impairment. 2. As of January 1, 2013, the Veteran's acquired psychiatric disability has resulted in total occupational and social impairment. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Prior to January 1, 2013, the criteria for a 70 percent disability rating, but no higher, for an acquired psychiatric disability have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155; 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.7, 4.10, 4.130, Diagnostic Code 9411. 2. As of January 1, 2013, the criteria for a 100 percent rating for an acquired psychiatric disability have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155; 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.7, 4.10, 4.130, Diagnostic Code 9411. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from August 1974 to December 1976. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2011 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ). The Veteran initially requested a Board hearing on his February 2012 VA Form 9. However, the Veteran withdrew his request for a hearing in August 2017 and October 2021 correspondences. Increased Ratings Disability ratings are determined by applying the criteria set forth in the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (Rating Schedule) and are intended to represent the average impairment of earning capacity resulting from disability. 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. § 4.1. Disabilities must be reviewed in relation to their history. 38 C.F.R. § 4.1. Other applicable, general policy considerations are: interpreting reports of examination in light of the whole recorded history, reconciling the various reports into a consistent picture so that the current rating may accurately reflect the elements of disability, 38 C.F.R. § 4.2; resolving any reasonable doubt regarding the degree of disability in favor of the claimant, 38 C.F.R. § 4.3; where there is a question as to which of two evaluations apply, assigning the higher of the two where the disability picture more nearly approximates the criteria for the next higher rating, 38 C.F.R. § 4.7; and, evaluating functional impairment on the basis of lack of usefulness and the effects of the disability upon the person's ordinary activity, 38 C.F.R. § 4.10. See Schafrath v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 589 (1991). Entitlement to a rating in excess of 30 percent for an acquired psychiatric disability for the period prior to February 7, 2012, and a rating in excess of 50 percent prior to July 19, 2014. The Veteran's acquired psychiatric disability is currently rated as 30 percent disabling prior to February 7, 2012, 50 percent disabling prior to July 19, 2014, and 100 percent disabling as of July 19, 2014. A 50 percent rating is assigned when symptoms such as flattened affect; circumstantial, circumlocutory, or stereotyped speech; panic attacks more than once a week; difficulty in understanding complex commands; impairment of short and long-term memory (e.g., retention of only highly learned material, forgetting to complete tasks); impaired judgment; impaired abstract thinking; disturbances of motivation and mood; or difficulty in establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships cause occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity. A 70 percent rating is assigned when symptoms such as suicidal ideation; obsessional rituals which interfere with routine activities; intermittently illogical, obscure, or irrelevant speech; near-continuous panic or depression affecting the ability to function independently, appropriately and effectively; impaired impulse control (such as unprovoked irritability with periods of violence); spatial disorientation; neglect of personal appearance and hygiene; difficulty in adapting to stressful circumstances (including work or a worklike setting); or inability to establish and maintain effective relationships cause occupational and social impairment with deficiencies in most areas, such as work, school, family relations, judgment, thinking, or mood. A 100 percent rating is assigned for total occupational and social impairment, due to such symptoms as: gross impairment in thought processes or communication; persistent delusions or hallucinations; grossly inappropriate behavior; persistent danger of hurting self or others; intermittent inability to perform activities of daily living (including maintenance of minimal personal hygiene); disorientation to time or place; or memory loss for names of close relatives, own occupation or own name. Under the General Formula for Mental Disorders (General Formula), the Board must conduct a "holistic analysis" that considers all associated symptoms, regardless of whether they are listed as criteria. Bankhead v. Shulkin, 29 Vet. App. 10, 22 (2017); 38 C.F.R. § 4.130. The Board must determine whether unlisted symptoms are similar in severity, frequency, and duration to the listed symptoms associated with specific disability percentages. Then, the Board must determine whether the associated symptoms, both listed and unlisted, caused the level of impairment required for a higher disability rating. Vazquez-Claudio v. Shinseki, 713 F.3d 112, 114-118 (Fed. Cir. 2013). Period prior to January 1, 2013. The Board finds that the Veteran's acquired psychiatric disability most closely approximates the criteria for a 70 percent rating for the period prior to 2013. However, the Veteran's symptoms did not cause the level of impairment required for a disability rating of 100 percent. The Veteran attended a VA examination in February 2011. The examiner found the Veteran had a mild to moderate level of social functioning, but the Veteran's condition did not impact his occupational functioning. The Veteran reported being socially withdrawn and reported conflict with his wife. The examiner stated that the Veteran was working full time and the Veteran attributed his occupational impairment to physical factors related to his service-connected conditions. The examiner stated the Veteran exhibited no inappropriate behavior and no significant impairment of thought process or communication. The Veteran's private provider, Dr. R.H., submitted several letters detailing the Veteran's disability. An October 2010 letter stated that the Veteran had depressed mood, flat affect, and reported insomnia. Thought process was unremarkable, with no delusions, and a past history of suicidal ideation but no current thoughts. The Veteran was currently employed and was able to perform the job as he is alone or with one partner for most of the day. Dr. R.H. stated that the condition significantly affected the Veteran's home life and his life at work. An April 2011 letter indicated that the Veteran has extreme anxiety and panic attacks and socially isolates himself. The Veteran reported nightmares, depression, and insomnia. Dr. R.H. stated that the Veteran experienced difficulties performing his tasks at his job, though he has continued working. A January 2012 letter continued to show depression, anxiety, panic attacks, and mood disturbances. The Veteran reported he was still working, but his job had turned into a chore and he socially isolated himself. The Veteran's wife submitted a statement in October 2010. She wrote that the Veteran had distanced himself from her as well as from his daughter and he no longer socialized with others. She stated he is frustrated with his disability, which has resulted in misdirected anger followed by withdrawal. For the period prior to January 1, 2013, the evidence of record shows that the Veteran's psychiatric disability has most closely approximated the criteria for the 70 percent rating during the period on appeal. The Veteran has exhibited occupational and social impairment, with deficiencies in most areas, such as work, school, family relations, judgment, thinking, or mood, as a result of symptoms including, depression, anxiety, panic attacks, difficulty sleeping, and irritable and angry outbursts. For the period prior to January 1, 2013, a higher rating of 100 percent is not warranted, as the Veteran did not have symptoms or overall impairment more closely approximating the criteria for a 100 percent rating. Although the Veteran reported difficulty concentrating at his job and interacting socially, he maintained full time employment at the Post Office. Therefore, the record does not show total occupational and social impairment, as required for the 100 percent schedular rating. The preponderance of the evidence supports a rating of 70 percent, but no higher, for the Veteran's service-connected psychiatric disability for the period prior to January 1, 2013. There is no reasonable doubt to be resolved as to this issue. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. Neither the Veteran nor his representative has raised any other issues, nor have any other issues been reasonably raised by the record. See Yancy v. McDonald, 27 Vet. App. 484, 495 (2016); Doucette v. Shulkin, 38 Vet. App. 366, 369-70 (2017) (confirming that the Board is not required to address issues unless they are specifically raised by the claimant or reasonably raised by the evidence of record). Period beginning January 1, 2013. The Board finds the Veteran's psychiatric disability most closely approximates the criteria for a 100 percent evaluation beginning January 1, 2013. The Veteran attended a VA examination in July 2014. The Veteran reported that he retired from working at the Post Office in January 2013. He stated that he retired early due to his anxiety and depression and towards the end of his career he received several disciplinary actions for missing too much time. The Veteran reported that he was married but has isolated and withdrawn from all family members and that he does not leave the house anymore. The Veteran reported numerous mental health symptoms, to include impaired judgement, inability to establish and maintain effective relationships, intermittent inability to perform activities of daily living, including maintenance of personal hygiene. The examiner found the Veteran had total occupational and social impairment. The Veteran's private provider, Dr. R.H., submitted a disability benefits questionnaire in January 2014. The private provider stated that the Veteran socially isolates himself and has symptoms of anxiety, depression, impaired judgement, and intermittent inability to perform activities of daily living. He also reported that the Veteran had to retire early from the Postal Service due to his psychiatric symptoms. R.H. stated that the Veteran's symptoms have gotten worse in the prior year as he was forced to retire early due to his anxiety and depression and his marriage has suffered. Both the VA examiner's report and the private provider report support the finding that the Veteran's psychiatric disability caused total social and occupational impairment as of January 1, 2013, the date the Veteran stopped working. The preponderance of the evidence supports a rating of 100 percent for the Veteran's service-connected psychiatric disability beginning January 1, 2013. There is no reasonable doubt to be resolved as to this issue. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. The Board notes that the Veteran is unemployable due solely to his service connected psychiatric disability. However, the Veteran does not have multiple separate ratings which combine to 60 percent or more. Therefore, the Veteran does not meet the requirements for special monthly compensation at the housebound rate and entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability is moot. 38 U.S.C. § 1114(s); 38 C.F.R. § 3.350(i); Bradley v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 280, 294 (2008). Tiffany Dawson Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board N. Patrick, 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.