Citation Nr: 21009592
Decision Date: 02/22/21	Archive Date: 02/22/21

DOCKET NO. 18-25 343
DATE: February 22, 2021

REMANDED

The issue of a disability rating greater than 70 percent prior to November 1, 2017, and greater than 30 percent from November 1, 2017, for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty from February 1990 to August 1992.

This case is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2017 rating decision from a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).

In December 2020, the Veteran testified at a Board virtual hearing.  The transcript of the hearing has been associated with the record.

In the December 2020 hearing, the Veteran testified that his PTSD has only worsened in the last 11 years.  The November 2017 VA examiner determined the Veteran’s symptoms were mild or transient; however, this assessment does not seem to reflect the Veteran’s disability picture, as shown by the record or the Veteran’s testimony, during the entire period on appeal.  The Veteran violated his probation in December 2017.  He received inpatient psychiatric treatment in January 2018, February 2018, April 2018, and July 2018.  The record also shows the Veteran has been housing insecure during the period on appeal.  The Veteran should be provided an opportunity to report for a VA examination to ascertain the current severity and manifestations of his PTSD.

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

Schedule the Veteran for an examination to determine the current severity of his service-connected PTSD.

The examiner should provide a full description of the disability and report all signs and symptoms necessary for evaluating the Veteran’s disability under the rating criteria.  The examiner must attempt to elicit information regarding the severity, frequency, and duration of symptoms.  To the extent possible, the examiner should identify any symptoms and social and occupational impairment due to his PTSD alone.

If the examiner cannot give an opinion without resorting to speculation, the examiner should explain why and state whether the need to speculate is due to a deficiency in the state of general medical knowledge (no one could respond given medical science and the known facts), the record (additional facts are required), or the examiner (does not have the knowledge or training).

 

 

JAMES L. MARCH

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans’ Appeals

Attorney for the Board	S. Costa, 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.