Citation Nr: 21009925 Decision Date: 02/23/21 Archive Date: 02/23/21 DOCKET NO. 20-20 933 DATE: February 23, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to a combined evaluation of 90 percent disabling for the Veteran's service-connected disabilities, effective July 19, 2017 is dismissed. REMANDED Entitlement to an earlier effective date of June 12, 2014, for the grant of service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded. FINDING OF FACT As of July 19, 2017, the combined evaluation of the Veteran's service-connected disabilities was 70 percent disabling. No error of law or fact has been established as to the combined rating calculation. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for dismissal of the Veteran’s claim of entitlement to a combined evaluation of 90 percent disabling the Veteran's service-connected disabilities, effective July 19, 2017 have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2014); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2018). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had honorable active duty service with the United States Army from October 1965 to July 1968. As a preliminary matter, the Board observes that the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) issued a decision, dated November 2017, which granted service connection for PTSD and assigned an evaluation of 50 percent disabling, effective July 17, 2017. In an October 2018 notice of disagreement (NOD), the Veteran disputed the assigned effective date. To date, a statement of the case (SOC) has not been issued as to the claim of entitlement to an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for PTSD. Therefore, the Board is required to remand this matter for issuance of an SOC. Manlicon v. West, 12 Vet. App. 238 (1999). In addition, the Board observes that the Veteran’s NOD also disputed the combined evaluation assigned to his service-connected disabilities. In a notification letter, dated November 2017, the Veteran was informed that his service-connected PTSD was assigned an evaluation of 50 percent disabling. The assigned evaluation for his service-connected prostate cancer, status/post radical prostatectomy with voiding dysfunction was increased from 20 percent disabling to 40 percent disabling, effective July 19, 2017. Considering the above, the combined evaluation of his service-connected disabilities was listed as 70 percent disabling. The Board notes that the mathematical formula for calculating combined evaluations are found at 38 C.F.R. § 4.25. Under Table I of the Combined Ratings Table, disabilities are arranged in the exact order of their severity; first by the most disabling condition and then by the less disabling condition, then by other less disabling conditions, if any. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.25 (a) and (b). Conversion to a percentage is to be done only once per rating decision, following the combining of all disabilities. 38 C.F.R. § 4.25 (b). In this case, application of the prescribed mathematical formula corresponds with a combined evaluation of 70 percent disabling. As the Board finds no error of law or fact exists, the Veteran’s dispute of the combined rating calculation is dismissed. 38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2014). REASONS FOR REMAND 1. Entitlement to an earlier effective date of June 12, 2014, for the grant of service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded. Pursuant to a November 2017 Rating Decision, the Veteran was granted service connection for PTSD and assigned an evaluation of 50 percent disabling, effective July 19, 2017. In a NOD, dated October 2018, the Veteran asserted entitlement to an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection. Specifically, he contends that an earlier effective date of June 12, 2014 is appropriate based upon the evidence of record. The Board observes that an SOC regarding the issue of entitlement to an earlier effective date has yet to be issued. Where a Veteran has submitted a timely NOD with an adverse decision, a remand is required for issuance of a SOC. Manlincon v. West, 12 Vet. App. 238, 240-241 (1999). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. The RO should issue the Veteran and his representative (if any) an SOC on the issue of entitlement to an earlier effective date of June 12, 2014, for the grant of service connection for PTSD. The Veteran should be given the opportunity to thereafter perfect an appeal on this issue by filing a timely substantive appeal. The claim will thereafter be subject to appellate review only if the appeal has been properly perfected. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). (Continued on the next page)   This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law requires all claims remanded by the Board or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims to be handled in an expeditious manner. See 38 U.S.C. §§ 5109B, 7112. B. MULLINS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board N. Whitaker, 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.