Citation Nr: 21071977 Decision Date: 12/01/21 Archive Date: 12/01/21 DOCKET NO. 15-07 558 DATE: December 1, 2021 ORDER From December 29, 2006, through to December 12, 2019, a 70-percent evaluation for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is granted. A total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) due to PTSD prior to December 13, 2019, is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. From December 29, 2006, through to December 12, 2019, the Veteran's PTSD has manifested by occupational and social impairment with deficiencies in most areas. 2. Prior to December 13, 2019, the Veteran's service-connected PTSD prevented him from securing or following a substantially gainful occupation. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. From December 29, 2006, through to December 12, 2019, a 70-percent evaluation for PTSD have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 4.130, Diagnostic Code (DC) 9411. 2. Prior to December 13, 2019, the criteria for TDIU due to PTSD have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. 3.340, 3.341, 4.15, 4.16. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from October 1959 to October 1963. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2012 rating decision. The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) in April 2018 via videoconference hearing; a transcript is of record. The Board previously remanded this matter in June 2018, November 2019, and July 2021. Increased Ratings Disability evaluations are determined by the application of a schedule of ratings, which is based on average impairment of earning capacity. Generally, the degrees of disability specified are considered adequate to compensate for considerable loss of working time from exacerbations or illnesses proportionate to the severity of the several grades of disability. 38 C.F.R. § 4.1. Separate DCs identify the various disabilities. 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. Part 4. Where there is a question as to which of two separate evaluations shall be applied, the higher evaluation will be assigned if the disability more closely approximates the criteria required for that particular rating; otherwise, the lower rating will be assigned. 38 C.F.R. § 4.7. Where the appeal arises from the original assignment of a disability evaluation following an award of service connection, the severity of the disability at issue is to be considered during the entire period from the initial assignment of the disability rating to the present time. Fenderson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 119, 126 (1999). In determining the present level of a disability for any increased rating claim, the Board must consider the application of staged ratings. Hart v. Mansfield, 21 Vet. App. 505, 509(2007). In other words, where the evidence contains factual findings that demonstrate distinct time periods in which the service-connected disability exhibited diverse symptoms meeting the criteria for different ratings during the appeal, the assignment of staged ratings is necessary. While VA considers the level of social impairment, it shall not assign an evaluation based solely on social impairment. 38 C.F.R. § 4.126. When all the evidence is assembled, VA is responsible for determining whether the evidence supports the claim or is in relative equipoise, with the Veteran prevailing in either event, or whether a fair preponderance of the evidence is against the claim, in which case the claim is denied. Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 55 (1990). From December 29, 2006, through to December 12, 2019, a 70-percent evaluation for PTSD is granted. The Veteran asserts an increase of at least 50 percent or higher should be granted effective the date of claim for his service-connected PTSD. See March 2013 Correspondence. The June 2012 decision on appeal awarded the Veteran service connection for PTSD with an evaluation of 30 percent effective December 29, 2006, under DC 9411. The Veteran timely appealed that evaluation in an August 2012 Notice of Disagreement (NOD). A December 2014 rating decision increased the Veteran's service-connected PTSD evaluation to 50 percent effective December 29, 2006, under DC 9411. In his March 2015 VA Form 9, the Veteran asserted the severity of his PTSD warranted an increased. A July 2020 rating decision increased the Veteran's service-connected PTSD evaluation to 100 percent effective December 13, 2019. PTSD is rated under the General Rating Formula for Mental Disorders. 38 C.F.R. § 4.130. Under DC 9411, a 30-percent disability rating is warranted for occupational and social impairment with occasional decrease in work efficiency and intermittent periods of inability to perform occupational tasks (although generally functioning satisfactorily, with routine behavior, self-care, and conversation normal), due to such symptoms as: depressed mood, anxiety, suspiciousness, panic attacks (weekly or less often), chronic sleep impairment, mild memory loss (such as forgetting names, directions, recent events). A 50-percent disability rating is warranted for occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity due to such symptoms 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; difficulty in establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships. A 70-percent disability rating is warranted for occupational and social impairment, with deficiencies in most areas, such as work, school, family relations, judgment, thinking, or mood, due to such symptoms as: suicidal ideation; obsessional rituals which interfere with routine activities; speech intermittently illogical, obscure, or irrelevant; 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 work like setting); inability to establish and maintain effective relationships. A 100-percent disability rating is warranted 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; memory loss for names of close relatives, own occupation, or own name. The symptoms associated with each evaluation under the General Rating Formula do not constitute an exhaustive list, but rather serve as examples of the type and degree of the symptoms, or their effects, that would justify a particular rating. See Mauerhan v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 436, 442 (2002). As a result, the evidence considered in determining the appropriate evaluation of a psychiatric disorder is not restricted to the symptoms set forth in the General Rating Formula. See id. If the evidence demonstrates that the claimant's psychiatric disorder produces symptoms and resulting occupational and social impairment equivalent to that set forth in the criteria for a given rating in the General Rating Formula, then the appropriate, equivalent rating will be assigned. Mauerhan, 16 Vet. App. at 443. In this regard, the Board must consider the frequency, severity, and duration of psychiatric symptoms, the length of remissions, and the Veteran's capacity for adjustment during periods of remission. 38 C.F.R. § 4.126 (2016); Vazquez-Claudio v. Shinseki, 713 F.3d 112, 117 (Fed. Cir. 2013) (noting that the "frequency, severity, and duration" of a veteran's symptoms "play an important role" in determining the disability level). The severity of the symptoms and the degree of occupational and social impairment they cause are independent factors. See Vazquez-Claudio, 713 F.3d at 116 (rejecting an interpretation of § 4.130 that would allow "a veteran whose symptoms correspond[ed] exactly to a 30 percent rating" to be granted a 70-percent rating solely because they affected most areas). In other words, there are two elements that must be met to assign a particular rating under the General Rating Formula: (1) symptoms equivalent in severity, frequency, and duration to the symptoms corresponding to a given rating, and (2) a level of occupational and social impairment corresponding to that rating that results from those symptoms. See id. at 118 (holding that, in determining whether a 70-percent rating is warranted, VA must make "an initial assessment of the symptoms displayed by the veteran, and if they are of the kind enumerated in the regulation, an assessment of whether those symptoms result in occupational and social impairment with deficiencies in most areas"). Turning to the evidence of record, a January 2007 Psychiatry Note is of record. The Veteran reported experiencing symptoms consistent with traumatic stress, including nightmares and anxiety attacks. He reports his symptoms are triggered by media reports of the Iraq War, and he tries not to watch the news but finds it difficult to avoid. He reported experiencing spells of "total weeping" associated with triggered memories. The Veteran reported more irritability than usual and experiencing mild symptoms of fatigue, loss of energy, sleep difficulties, and concentration difficulties, an increased appetite, and a loss of sexual interest. He reported riding bicycles, taking walks on the family farm, or getting involved in activities to cope with anxiety and stress. He reported anxious and depressed moments. The Veteran acknowledged occasional thoughts of suicide in the past; however, he denied any plan or intent. He denied current and past homicidal thoughts. For leisure, the Veteran reported taking part in hunting, fishing, reading novels, building, and listening to music. On examination, the Veteran was timely for his interview. He was casually and appropriately dressed for the evaluation, and his grooming and hygiene were unremarkable. Mood was found to be mildly dysthymic, and affect was of a normal range and appropriate to speech content. Eye contact was intermittent. He responded to the interviewer in a cooperative manner and answered all questions asked of him. He appeared to have a good memory for both recent and remote events. His speech was of a normal rate and volume, logical, and goal-directed with no evidence of unusual thought processes. The examiner found the Veteran experienced symptoms of generalized anxiety and depression. A July 2009 PTSD Group Therapy Note is of record. The Veteran shared trust and safety issues were preventing him from returning to psychotherapy. Group leaders encouraged the Veteran to return to see his psychologist. The Veteran shared a history of walking away from issues. An Initial PTSD Disability Benefits Questionnaire was completed in January 2012. The Veteran's occupational and social impairment was found to consist of mild or transient symptoms that decrease work efficiency and ability to perform occupational tasks only during periods of significant stress or symptoms are controlled by medication. On examination, the Veteran was noted to be "ok" as to person, place, time, and situation. His appearance was described as clean, neatly groomed, and appropriately dressed. His behavior was found to be appropriate to the occasion. His mood was noted to be good. His affect was normal and appropriate. His speech was noted to be fluent and normal concerning rate, rhythm, volume, and prosody. His grammar was fully intact with no evidence of paraphasias or word-finding difficulties. Comprehension was found to be intact. The Veteran's thought process was noted to be linear, coherent, logical, and goal directed with no flight of ideas, loose associations, thought derailment, thought blocking, grandiosity, tangentiality, or circumstantiality. His insight and judgment were noted to be "ok." Memory, attention, and concentration were also noted to be okay. The Veteran denied suicidal ideation or homicidal ideation and denied excessive worry, panic attacks, obsessive thoughts, compulsive thoughts, or ritualistic behaviors. The Veteran also denied audio hallucinations, visual hallucinations, paranoia, thought blocking, or thought insertion. The Veteran's symptoms were found to include a depressed mood, anxiety, chronic sleep impairment, and disturbances of motivation and mood. The Veteran was found to be capable of managing of his financial affairs. The Veteran was assessed by psychiatry in September 2013. The Veteran reported his medication had been helpful with his PTSD and insomnia as he was getting better sleep with few intrusive thoughts. He reported going out to watch NASCAR. He also reported living with his girlfriend for six years. He recalled getting into an argument with his girlfriend after becoming angry and yelling at her; however, he appeared violent enough that she left for five days. On examination, the Veteran was noted to be pleasant, and his speech was stated to be clear with no dysarthria. His thought processes were found to be logical with no problems with tangentiality. The Veteran denied hallucinations. His mood was mildly anxious and affect congruent with mood. Insight and judgment were intact, and he was noted to be able to make good decisions. Cognitively, he was found to be fully oriented, functional, and with a good memory, attention, and concentration. No homicidal or suicidal ideation was reported. An October 2014 Psychiatry Note is of record. The treatment report notes the Veteran's symptoms include social isolation, avoidance behavior, hypervigilance, an exaggerated startle response, sleep disturbance, and nightmares. The Veteran also endorsed irritability, an increase in hypervigilance, paranoia, and depression. The Veteran denied audio hallucinations or visual hallucinations or other perceptual disturbances or psychotic features. The Veteran was tearful describing his symptoms, and he reported struggling to enjoy things he had previously enjoyed. He denied suicidal ideation, homicidal ideation, or other violent ideations. He endorsed feeling hopeful about the future, but he reported at times feeling emotionally weak. He enjoys reading, fishing, spending time with his girlfriend, spending time with friends and family, and getting support from his local VFW. He reported having hunting buddies. He also reported emotional outbursts and struggling with these episodes. A VA examination is of record from August 2017. The Veteran's occupational and social impairment was found to consist of an occasional decrease in work efficiency and intermittent periods of an inability to perform occupational tasks, although generally functioning satisfactorily, with normal routine behavior, self-care, and conversation. The report notes since the Veteran's last evaluation in December 2014, he continues to live with his girlfriend. He described his relationship with his girlfriend as being "very good," and his girlfriend and her three daughters are some of the most important people in his life. He reported having friends and attending church. He noted his hobbies to include reading, hunting, fishing, traveling, and attending bluegrass festivals. He said he is able to meet and talk with some of his favorite musicians. He reported driving himself to the evaluation. The report notes the Veteran has not worked since 2005 or completed any educational or vocational training. The Veteran reported continuing to struggle with symptoms of PTSD. For example, he reported sleeping five to six hours per night, and he continues to wake up between midnight and four o'clock in the morning "for the night watch," which he said relates to one of the traumatic events he experienced during active service. He reported having a lot of anxiety and rated his anxiety as being very high. He also reported being "down in the dumps" on about 75 percent of days. He indicated experiencing a lot of intrusive thoughts from the past. He endorsed some suicidal ideation within the past several years and said he has developed a plan in the past but denied intent or attempts. He then mentioned two suicide attempts while being intoxicated where he jumped off some stairs because he thought he could fly. At a prior psychiatric appointment, it was noted the Veteran denied imminent intent to commit suicide but also reported past ideation to kill himself by carbon monoxide. The examiner noted the Veteran had fair insight, judgment, and good impulse control. His cognitive function was noted to be grossly intact. The Veteran also reported additional symptoms of feeling on edge and being watchful, even without a specific threat, and is easily woken by sounds at night, to the point that his girlfriend sleeps in a different room. He reported some difficulties related to concentration. He endorsed negative and pessimistic beliefs about the world and expressed anxiety about his worldview. He reported intentional avoidance of stimuli associated with traumatic events and said he tried to plan activities for each day over several hours so he can keep himself busy. He reported having nightmares related to his traumatic experiences in addition to some night sweats. He said other people have commented on hearing him at night, from other rooms. While recounting some of these traumatic experiences, he appeared emotionally reactive and upset. The Veteran's PTSD symptoms were found to include a depressed mood; anxiety; suspiciousness; chronic sleep impairment; and mild memory loss, such as forgetting names, directions, or recent events. He was found to be able to manage his financial affairs. On examination, the Veteran was found to be alert and fully oriented. His thoughts were logical and goal directed. Speech was fluent and at a normal rate, tone, volume, and prosody without paraphasic errors. Auditory comprehension appeared intact. His mood was labile, and he cried at multiple times. The Veteran was engaged. He exhibited grossly intact insight and deficit awareness. There were no hallucinations or other indication of a formal thought disorder. The Veteran reported passive suicidal ideation without intent or plan. He denied homicidality and did not present as an elevated risk to himself or others. The Veteran noted he did not "like to talk about this stuff," and he believes if he answered the questions asked fully of him, he would have been service connected at 100 percent. The Veteran received a VA examination in December 2019. The Veteran's service-connected PTSD was found to consist of total occupational and social impairment. The Veteran's symptoms were found to include a depressed mood; anxiety; suspiciousness; chronic sleep impairment; disturbances of motivation and mood; a difficulty in establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships; a difficulty in adapting to stressful circumstances, including work or a work-like setting; an inability to establish and maintain effective relationships; and suicidal ideation. The Veteran was found to be capable of managing of his financial affairs. On examination, the Veteran presented as depressed. He was tearful throughout the interview. He was found to be polite, alert, cooperative, and oriented to three spheres. He presented with a full affect. The Veteran displayed good hygiene and was casually dressed. He was able to make good eye contact, and his tone and volume of voice were typical. The Veteran presented with some psychomotor agitation that he attributed to his anxiety. The Veteran endorsed a history of difficulty with concentration and short-term memory issues. He stated he experiences a fluctuating appetite and chronic sleep impairment. The Veteran denied any experience of auditory, tactile, or visual hallucinations. He did not present with any report symptoms indicative of a thought process disorder. He reported experiencing intermittent suicidal ideation. He denied homicidal ideation. The Veteran attended a Board hearing in April 2018. The Veteran reported suicidal ideation "all the time." He stated he experiences PTSD symptoms almost every day. He reported isolating himself from others. He indicated having nightmares and sleep impairment. He occasionally visits the VFW, goes out to dinner once a week, and visits his daughter. His girlfriend reported that the Veteran is short-tempered and snaps quickly. She also noted he goes into a trance, and one time, he kicked her out of her own home. He endorsed being easily startled. He reported retiring in 2005 as a carpenter and believing his PTSD would interfere with employment because of problems with concentration. He also felt his anger would interfere with his employment. On review of the evidence, the Board finds the Veteran's PTSD symptoms more nearly approximate the criteria for an initial 70-percent rating for the rating period from December 29, 2006, through to December 12, 2019. For that rating period, the Veteran's PTSD has been manifested by occupational and social impairment, with deficiencies in most areas such as family and social relations, judgment, thinking, or mood, due to such symptoms as, an impaired impulse control, intermittent suicidal ideation, a difficulty in adapting to stressful circumstances (including work or work like setting), and an inability to establish and maintain effective relationships. The record demonstrates the Veteran experiences anxiety, chronic sleep impairment, and suicidal ideation. For example, a January 2007 Psychiatry Note documents symptoms including nightmares, anxiety attacks, irritability, fatigue or loss of energy, sleep difficulties, problems with concentration, an increased appetite, a loss of sexual interest, and experiencing spells of "total weeping" associated with these triggered memories. The Board finds the severity of such symptoms more closely approximate the 70-percent rating criteria. As noted above, the evidence considered in determining the appropriate evaluation of a psychiatric disorder is not restricted to the symptoms set forth in the General Rating Formula, and if the evidence demonstrates the claimant's psychiatric disorder produces symptoms and resulting occupational and social impairment equivalent to that set forth in the criteria for a given rating in the General Rating Formula, then the appropriate, equivalent rating will be assigned. Mauerhan, 16 Vet. App. at 443. Additionally, the January 2007 Psychiatry Note documents the Veteran acknowledged occasional thoughts of suicide in the past; however, he denied any plan or intent at any point. In this regard, the Court has held that suicidal ideation generally rises to the level contemplated in a 70-percent evaluation. See Bankhead v. Shulkin, 29Vet. App.10, 21 (2017). The Court specified that VA must not require "more than thought or thoughts to establish the symptom of suicidal ideation" and may not require the Veteran have "been hospitalized or treated on an inpatient basis" to establish suicidal ideation because that "imposes a higher standard than the criteria in the [Diagnostic Code] for mental disorders." Bankhead, 29 Vet App. at 20. Moreover, the Court cautioned VA not to conflate the risk of "suicidal ideation, which VA generally considers indicative of a 70 [percent] evaluation, and his risk of self-harm, the persistent danger of which VA generally considers indicative of a 100 [percent] evaluation." Id. at 21. The Board finds the Veteran's reports of suicidal ideation appears constant, or near-constant at times, throughout the appeal period. There is no indication the Veteran received inpatient medical treatment related to his suicidal ideation. Thus, the evidence does not demonstrate a persistent danger of hurting self or others, a symptom associated with a 100-percent disability rating. Considering the foregoing and resolving any benefit of the doubt to the Veteran, the Board finds a 70-percent disability rating is warranted for PTSD for the initial rating period from December 29, 2006, through to December 12, 2019. The Board notes that from December 13, 2019, the Veteran is in receipt of a 100-percent rating for his PTSD, the highest allowed under DC 9411. Prior to December 13, 2019, the Board concludes the Veteran's PTSD symptomatology has not approximated the criteria for a 100-percent rating under DC 9411 at any point through that initial rating period. The evidence does not show the Veteran had 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; an 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. The Veteran maintained relationships with his girlfriend and daughter, occasionally visited the VFW, went out to dinner weekly. As such, the Veteran's PTSD symptoms did not cause, or more nearly approximate, total social impairment. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence, as summarized above, the Board finds an increased rating is warranted because there is evidence suggesting the Veteran suffers occupational and social impairment, with deficiencies in most areas due to his PTSD, and thus, the Veteran's disability picture for his PTSD most closely approximates the 70-percent disability rating from December 29, 2006, through to December 12, 2019. 1. A TDIU due to PTSD prior to December 13, 2019, is granted. Under the applicable criteria, total disability ratings for compensation based upon individual unemployability may be assigned where the schedular rating is less than total, when it is found that the disabled person is unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation as a result of a single service-connected disability ratable at 60 percent or more, or as a result of two or more disabilities, provided at least one disability is ratable at 40 percent or more and there is sufficient additional service-connected disability to bring the combined rating to 70 percent or more. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.340, 3.341, 4.16(a). It is the established policy of VA that all veterans who are unable to secure and follow a substantially gainful occupation by reasons of service-connected disabilities shall be rated totally disabled. Therefore, in the case of veterans who are unemployable by reason of service-connected disabilities but who do not meet these schedular percentage standards set forth in 38 C.F.R. § 4.16 (a), the case should be submitted to the Director of the Compensation Service for extraschedular consideration. The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, employment history, educational and vocational attainment, and all other factors must be considered. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.16 (b). The central inquiry is "whether a veteran's service-connected disabilities alone are of sufficient severity to produce unemployability." See Hatlestad v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 524, 529 (1993). The Board will not consider age or impairment caused by non-service-connected disabilities. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.340, 3.341, 4.16, 4.19; see also Van Hoose v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 361 (1993). The sole fact a claimant is unemployed or has difficulty obtaining employment is not enough. A high rating in itself is recognition that the impairment makes it difficult to obtain or keep employment. The ultimate question, however, is whether a veteran can perform the physical and mental acts required by employment, not whether he or she can find employment. Van Hoose, 4 Vet. App. at 363. Prior to December 13, 2019, the Veteran has a singular disability rated at least 60 percent, as his PTSD is rated at 70 percent; thus, he meets the schedular requirements for a TDIU. He is also in receipt of evaluations for bilateral hearing loss rated as noncompensable prior to October 19, 2020, and tinnitus, rated as 10 percent. The Board finds the preponderance of evidence shows the Veteran is unemployable due to his service-connected PTSD. The medical evidence and the Veteran's lay statements provide the Veteran had to stop working due to his PTSD. The Veteran had been employed as a carpenter until 2005 when he retired, and the medical and lay evidence document problems with concentration, irritability, anger, and chronic sleep impairment symptoms that are certainly sufficient to produce unemployability in the trade of carpentry. Accordingly, the Board finds the preponderance of the evidence is in favor of the claim and a TDIU due to PTSD is warranted prior to December 13, 2019. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. The Board notes for the period from December 13, 2019, forward, since the Veteran is in receipt of a 100-percent rating for PTSD, the Board finds entitlement to a TDIU from such date is rendered moot for the reasons expressed below. The United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court/CAVC) has held that a 100-percent schedular rating under the Schedule for Rating Disabilities means that a Veteran is totally disabled. See Holland v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 443, 446 (1994). Thus, if VA has found a Veteran to be totally disabled because of a particular service-connected disability or combination of disabilities pursuant to the Rating Schedule, there is no need, and no authority, to otherwise rate the Veteran totally disabled on any other basis. See Herlehy v. Principi, 15 Vet. App. 33, 35 (2001). The Court subsequently held, however, the award of a 100-percent disability rating does not render moot a claim of entitlement to a TDIU. See Bradley v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 280 (2008). The Court determined a separate TDIU predicated on one disability (although perhaps not ratable at the schedular 100-percent level) when considered together with another disability separately rated at 60 percent or more could warrant SMC under 38 U.S.C. § 1114 (s). Thus, the Court reasoned, it might benefit the Veteran to retain or obtain the TDIU even where a 100-percent schedular rating also has been granted. Bradley, at 293-94. VA must consider a TDIU claim despite the existence of a schedular total rating and award SMC under 38 U.S.C. § 1114 (s) if VA finds the separate disability supports a TDIU independent of the other 100-percent disability rating. See id. Subsection 1114 (s) requires a disabled Veteran whose disability level is determined by the ratings schedule must have at least one disability that is rated at 100 percent to qualify for the SMC provided by that statute. The Court declared, however, if a Veteran were awarded a TDIU based on multiple underlying disabilities and then later receives a schedular disability rating for a single, separate disability that would, by itself, create the basis for an award of a TDIU, that the order of the awards was not relevant to the inquiry as to whether any of the disabilities alone would render him unemployable and thus entitled to a TDIU based on that condition alone. Buie v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 242, 250 (2010). (Continued on the next page) Here, service connection is in effect for PTSD which is rated as 100-percent disabling since December 13, 2019. Considering Buie and Bradley, and VA's obligation to maximize the Veteran's benefits, the Board has considered whether the Veteran meets the criteria for a TDIU based on the impact of his remaining service-connected disabilities and whether these disabilities would allow for additional SMC entitlement under 38 U.S.C. § 1114. The Board notes none of the Veteran's service-connected conditions (i.e., bilateral hearing loss rated as 10 percent from October 19, 2020, forward, and noncompensable prior to that and tinnitus, 10 percent) are independently ratable at 60 percent, separate, and distinct from PTSD, nor has he asserted that he is permanently housebound by reason of his service-connected disabilities. Therefore, the Board finds there is no pending, raised issue as to SMC Therefore, entitlement to a TDIU is moot from December 13, 2019, because the Veteran has a 100-percent schedular rating for a single disability, and his remaining service-connected disabilities alone are not independently ratable at 60 percent or more to entitle the Veteran to SMC. The issue of entitlement to a TDIU from December 13, 2019, is therefore dismissed. P. M. DILORENZO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Buck Denton 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.