Citation Nr: 21032512 Decision Date: 05/27/21 Archive Date: 05/27/21 DOCKET NO. 17-38 024 DATE: May 27, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to an effective date of January 1, 2006, but no earlier, for the award of service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran filed an original claim of service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) on January 1, 2006. His claim was denied in rating decisions dated on May 31, 2007 and October 10, 2007. The Veteran was notified of the October 2007 decision in a letter dated on October 18, 2007. 2. In a letter received by VA on October 17, 2008, the Veteran requested a personal hearing to present new evidence to support his claim of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder and indicated that he had been diagnosed with PTSD. The additional information from the letter confirms that it is a disagreement with his denial. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) did not respond to the Veteran's letter. 3. The Veteran filed a claim to reopen the issue of service connection for PTSD on July 8, 2014. In a December 2014 rating decision, the RO granted service connection for PTSD, effective from July 8, 2014. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to an effective date of January 1, 2006, but no earlier, for the award of service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 5107, 5110; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.155, 3.400. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active duty service from July 1981 to August 1992 and from December 2003 to December 2004. This appeal is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a December 2014 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO), which granted service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) effective from July 8, 2014. The Veteran has appealed the effective date assigned, contending that he is entitled to an effective date of January 1, 2006, the date of his original claim of service connection for PTSD. The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) in a March 2021 hearing. A copy of the hearing transcript has been reviewed and associated with the claims file. The Board notes that the Veteran submitted a Notice of Disagreement (NOD) for the issues of service connection for neoplasm of the kidney, a respiratory condition, and sleep apnea in April 2018. These issues are currently in development at the RO level and a Statement of the Case (SOC) has not yet been issued. Therefore, those issues are not currently within the Board's jurisdiction. Entitlement to an effective date prior to July 8, 2014 for the award of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) Generally, the effective date for a grant of service connection is the date of receipt of the claim or date entitlement arose, whichever is later. 38 U.S.C. § 5110(a); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400. The United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) has made it clear that the date of the filing of a claim is controlling in determinations as to effective dates. See Lalonde v. West, 12 Vet. App. 377, 380 (1999) (citing Hazan v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 511 (1997); Washington v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 391 (1997); and Wright v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 343 (1997). In Lalonde v. West, 12 Vet. App. 377, 380 (1999), the Court stated that the effective date of an award of service connection is not based upon the date of the earliest medical evidence demonstrating entitlement, but on the date that the application upon which service connection was eventually awarded was filed with VA. A rating decision issued by a VA Regional Office (RO) becomes final unless a Notice of Disagreement (NOD) is received within one year. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1103. Effective March 24, 2015, a NOD must be submitted via a specific form provided by VA (Form 21-0958). 38 C.F.R. § 20.201. However, under the version of 38 C.F.R. § 20.201 in effect in 2008, any written communication from a claimant or his or her representative expressing dissatisfaction or disagreement with a rating decision and a desire to contest the result will constitute a NOD. No special wording is required. 38 C.F.R. § 20.201 (2008). For claims received prior to March 24, 2015, VA applies a liberal interpretation in determining what constitutes a NOD. Palmer v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 434, 437 (2007). When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, VA shall resolve reasonable doubt in favor of the claimant. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 53-56 (1990). The Veteran was awarded service connection for PTSD effective from July 8, 2014. He asserts that he is entitled to an earlier effective date for his disability. A VA examination was conducted in December 2014. The examiner confirmed the Veteran's PTSD diagnosis and opined that his PTSD is at least as likely as not related to his active duty service, specifically his service in Iraq. The examiner also pointed out that his VA treatment records indicate that he has been diagnosed with PTSD since 2005. Having established that the Veteran has been diagnosed with service-related PTSD throughout the rating period on appeal, the remaining question is whether the October 2007 rating decision denying service connection became final. The Veteran filed his claim for service connection for PTSD on January 1, 2006. A review of the claims file indicates that he did not file any claims for a psychiatric disorder prior to January 1, 2006. The RO denied service connection for PTSD in a May 2007 rating decision and confirmed its denial in an October 10, 2007 rating decision. The Veteran was informed of this decision in a letter dated on October 18, 2007. In a letter received by VA on October 17, 2008, the Veteran indicated that he had new evidence to submit and requested a hearing on his claim of service connection for PTSD. VA did not respond to the Veteran's letter. The Veteran submitted a letter received by VA on October 17, 2008, requesting a "personal hearing" to present additional evidence in support of his claim of service connection for PTSD. He indicated that he had additional therapy notes that were not submitted with his original claim. VA did not respond to the Veteran's correspondence, and he did not submit another formal claim until July 2014. The Board finds that the Veteran's October 17, 2008 letter constitutes a Notice of Disagreement (NOD) with the October 2007 rating decision. 38 C.F.R. § 20.201 (2008); see also Palmer, 21 Vet. App. at 437. His letter was sufficiently detailed to indicate his disagreement with the RO's rating decision regarding his service connection claim for a psychiatric disorder, and it also notified VA that the Veteran had additional evidence to submit. Because the NOD was submitted within one year of the notification of the rating decision, the NOD is timely, and the October 2007 denial of service connection never became final. Thus, the Board finds that the rating period on appeal begins on January 1, 2006, the date of the Veteran's initial claim of service connection. Because the Veteran has proven that his service-connected PTSD has been present throughout the entire rating period on appeal, the Board finds that he is entitled to an effective date of January 1, 2006. Because the effective date for a service-connected disability is the later of the date a claim was filed or the date entitlement arose, the Board finds that an effective date of January 1, 2006, the date of his original claim for entitlement to service connection for PTSD, is warranted. This is considered a full grant of the benefits sought on appeal. Eric S. Leboff Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Pratt 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.