Citation Nr: 21041553 Decision Date: 07/09/21 Archive Date: 07/09/21 DOCKET NO. 15-05 097 DATE: July 9, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent from August 1, 2011 to March 3, 2013, in excess of 50 percent from March 4, 2013 to October 26, 2014, and in excess of 70 percent from October 27, 2014 for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) with insomnia is denied. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) due to service-connected disabilities prior to March 4, 2013, and from November 10, 2014 is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. From August 1, 2011 to March 3, 2013, the Veteran's PTSD with insomnia was manifested by occupational and social impairment due to mild or transient symptoms. 2. From March 4, 2013 to October 26, 2014, the severity, frequency, and duration of the Veteran's PTSD with insomnia symptoms most nearly approximated occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity. 3. From October 27, 2014, the Veteran's PTSD with insomnia did not cause total social and occupational impairment. 4. Prior to March 4, 2013, and from November 10, 2014 the Veteran's service-connected disabilities are not shown to render him incapable of securing or following a substantially gainful occupation. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for an initial rating in excess of 10 percent from August 1, 2011 to March 3, 2013, in excess of 50 percent from March 4, 2013 to October 26, 2014, and in excess of 70 percent from October 27, 2014 for PTSD with insomnia have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.1, 4.3, 4.7, 4.126, 4.130, Diagnostic Code 9410-9411. 2. The criteria for a TDIU prior to March 4, 2013 and from November 10, 2014 are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5103, 5103A, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.340, 4.15, 4.16. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from July 1990 to July 2011. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2013 rating decision that granted service connection for primary insomnia and assigned a noncompensable disability rating, effective August 1, 2011. During the course of the appeal, the rating for the Veteran's primary insomnia was increased to 10 percent as of August 1, 2011, and to 50 percent as of March 4, 2013. In August 2015, he was awarded service connection for PTSD, effective October 27, 2014, and assigned a 70 percent rating for PTSD with insomnia as of that date. Amberman v. Shinseki, 570 F.3d 1377, 1381 (Fed. Cir. 2009); 38 C.F.R. § 4.14 (The evaluation of the same disability under several diagnostic codes, known as pyramiding, must be avoided.). The Veteran's claim for a TDIU is part and parcel of his increased rating claim. Rice v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 447, 453-54(2009).The RO awarded a TDIU effective from March 4, 2013, to November 9, 2014, noting that the issue of a TDIU was moot as of November 10, 2014, as this was the date that the Veteran's service-connected disabilities combined to a 100 percent schedular rating. However, in this case the Board finds that a TDIU must still be considered from November 10, 2014, forward, (for example, due to PTSD with insomnia alone) in order to potentially make the Veteran eligible for special monthly compensation. See Bradley v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 280 (2008) (holding that there could be a situation where a Veteran has a schedular total rating for a particular service-connected disability, and could establish a TDIU rating for another service-connected disability in order to qualify for special monthly compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1114(s) by having an "additional" disability of 60 percent or more ("housebound rate")). These matters were remanded by the Board for additional development in February 2019. 1. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent from August 1, 2011 to March 3, 2013, in excess of 50 percent from March 4, 2013 to October 26, 2014, and in excess of 70 percent from October 27, 2014 for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) with insomnia Disability ratings are determined by applying the criteria set forth in the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities, found in 38 C.F.R., Part 4. The percentages are based on the average impairment of earning capacity as a result of service-connected disability, and separate diagnostic codes identify the various disabilities and the criteria for specific ratings. 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. § 4.1. If two disability evaluations are potentially applicable, the higher evaluation will be assigned if the disability picture more nearly approximates the criteria for that rating; otherwise, the lower rating will be assigned. 38 C.F.R. § 4.7. All reasonable doubt as to the degree of disability will be resolved in favor of the claimant. 38 C.F.R. § 4.3. Where entitlement to compensation has already been established and an increase in the disability rating is at issue, the primary concern is the present level of disability. Francisco v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 55, 58 (1994). However, the Board must also consider staged ratings. Hart v. Mansfield, 21 Vet. App. 505, 50910 (2007). The evaluation of the same disability under several diagnostic codes, known as pyramiding, must be avoided; however, separate ratings may be assigned for distinct disabilities resulting from the same injury so long as the symptomatology for one condition is not duplicative of or overlapping with the symptomatology of the other. Esteban v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 259, 262 (1994); 38 C.F.R. § 4.14. Hyphenated diagnostic codes are used when a rating under one diagnostic code requires the use of an additional diagnostic code to identify the basis for the evaluation assigned; the additional code is shown after the hyphen. The Veteran has an initial rating of 10 percent for his insomnia effective August 1, 2011 to March 3, 2013, and a 50 percent rating from March 4, 2013 to October 26, 2014 rating under DC 9499-9410. From October 27, 2014, the RO changed the DC for the Veteran's psychiatric disability to 9499-9411 for PTSD with insomnia and assigned a rating of 70 percent thereof. 38 C.F.R. § 4.130. Psychiatric disabilities are rated based on the General Rating Formula codified in 38 C.F.R. § 4.130, which provides disability ratings are based on a spectrum of symptoms. "A veteran may qualify for a given disability rating by demonstrating the particular symptoms associated with that percentage, or others of a similar severity, frequency, and duration." Vazquez-Claudio v. Shinseki, 713 F.3d 112, 117 (Fed. Cir. 2013). VA must consider all symptoms of a claimant's condition that affect the level of occupational and social impairment, including, if applicable, those identified in the American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed. 1994) (DSM-IV) and (5th ed. 2013) (DSM-5). See Mauerhan v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 436, 44243 (2002). VA is to engage in a holistic analysis in which it assesses the severity, frequency, and duration of the signs and symptoms of the veteran's service-connected mental disorder; quantifies the level of occupational and social impairment caused by those signs and symptoms; and assigns an evaluation that most nearly approximates that level of occupational and social impairment. Bankhead v. Shulkin, 29 Vet. App. 10, 22 (2017). Under the General Rating Formula for Mental Disorders per 38 C.F.R. § 4.130,a 10 percent disability rating is warranted when there is occupational and social impairment due to mild or transient symptoms which decrease work efficiency and ability to perform occupational tasks only during periods of significant stress, or symptoms controlled by continuous medication. A 30 percent disability rating is warranted when there is occupational and social impairment with occasional decreases 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, and mild memory loss (such as forgetting names, directions, recent events). A 50 percent rating is warranted if the disability is productive of 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 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. The criteria for a 100 percent rating are: 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 hygiene); disorientation to time or place; memory loss for names of close relatives, own occupation, or own name. A May 2011 VA pre-discharge examination reported not that the Veteran had normal behavior and was capable of handling his own affairs. A June 2011 email from the Veteran's in-service physician noted that the Veteran's insomnia could be treated with over the counter medication or the IBS antidepressant would have a beneficial side effect which would help with insomnia. A March 2013 VA mental health treatment note shows that the Veteran was well groomed and casually dressed. He was talkative and interactive. Speech was clear and coherent. Thought process was tangential. Mood dysphoric, affect congruent. He denied suicidal and homicidal ideations and psychosis. The Veteran reported problems with sleeping. The Veteran reported usually being tired because he had worked hard all day, but would take 2 to 4 hours for him to get to sleep and then only sleep for 4 hours. The Veteran and VA social worker discussed stressors the Veteran was under but the Veteran reported that his schedule was manageable and under control. He was not stressed by finances or family problems. The only stressor reported was his work on his home and getting it remodeled. A July 2013 VA mental health treatment note shows that the Veteran arrived with his spouse to talk about his poor sleep. They both reported his experience of nightmares. The Veteran was also noted to be in a more agitated mood and incidents where his children had cried after speaking with the Veteran. His wife reported that she did not see the Veteran as someone that was a harm to self or others. His medication was noted to be increase which improved his sleep pattern. The Veteran was assessed with primary insomnia with considering co-morbid PTSD and adjustment disorder with mixed anxiety/depressed mood. The Veteran was noted to be refurbishing an old hotel into a retirement home. An October 2013 VA mental health treatment record shows the Veteran denied depressed mood and "was not really sad" about anything. He felt that his anger/irritability especially towards his children had slightly improved but continued to wax/wane depending on stressors. A May 2014 VA mental health treatment record shows the Veteran denied sustained depressed mood, tearfulness, hopelessness. He stated his sleep was "pretty good balanced at this point." The Veteran reported he tried to stay involved with his kids at school, but finds that he isolated at times from the chaos of family life. A September 2014 VA mental health treatment note shows that the Veteran's mood was in general as disinterested and non-motivated but not always. The past two weeks his mood was problematic on all days. The Veteran reported sleeping difficulties secondary to irritability. The Veteran felt uneasy and on guard most times that made his heartbeat quickly which made it hard for him to concentrate during the day. Suicidal and homicidal ideations were not assessed. The Veteran was diagnosed with and adjustment disorder with disturbances of mood that was moderate, PTSD moderate, and insomnia moderate. A May 2015 VA PTSD DBQ shows that the Veteran was diagnosed with PTSD with primary insomnia and irritable bowel syndrome. The examiner assessed the Veteran's PTSD as causing occupational and social impairment with deficiencies in most areas, such as work, school, family relations, judgement, thinking and/or mood. The Veteran was noted have been married for 23 years and has two teenage children. He described their marriage as good. The Veteran reported earning two Bachelors of Sciences degrees while in the Navy in Mathematics/Computer Science and Physics. He also earned a Master's Degree in oceanography, antisubmarine warfare, and systems technology. He reported working in the field of nuclear power in submarines and surface ships. The Veteran was not working since his retirement in 2011. The examiner assessed the Veteran's PTSD symptoms as chronic sleep impairment, flattened affect, disturbances of motivation and mood, difficulty in establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships. A December 2015 VA mental health treatment note shows the Veteran reported anger, depression, agitated mood, and anxiety. The Veteran also reported isolating himself with his work. No suicidal and homicidal thoughts, intent, or plans were reported. The Veteran reported his attentiveness was not as good as it used to be and felt zombie like. The Veteran reported feeling angry all the time. A March 2016 VA mental health treatment note shows that the Veteran arrived in a good mood. The Veteran discussed issues of the him being retired at a young age. Both the Veteran and his spouse did not work other than volunteer opportunities, as their life was centered around their kids. The Veteran had tried a few job interviews but understood the impact of his medical conditions. He reported that he did not see himself as a "8 to 5" type of worker. The Veteran was noted to hold on to anger issues. A September 2016 VA mental health treatment note shows that the Veteran was assessed with anger issues and experiencing more panic attacks along with sleeping difficulties. An April 2017 VA mental health treatment note shows that the Veteran had an agitated mood and poor sleep. He reported paranoia and kept himself and family off social media. He reported being worried about a terrorist group in Kansas finding him. The Veteran was noted to be stable but had poor sleep, agitated mood, and paranoia. A May 2017 VA mental health treatment note shows that the Veteran arrived in a good mood. The Veteran continued to do work around the house and walk with his spouse. The Veteran was assessed as stable and did not appear depressed but was in the same "rut." The Veteran was noted to have little enjoyment with his accomplishments. He reported that he would rather be alone than enjoying time with his family. He reported that he did not like this and felt guilt about it. The Veteran was noted to have continuing sleep problems. Motivation and energy remained low during the day after getting the kids out the door in the morning. Mental status examination was normal and he did not appear to be in danger to self or others. An October 2019 VA PTSD DBQ shows that the Veteran was diagnosed with PTSD. Occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity were assessed. Since the last VA examination, the Veteran had not worked or gone to school. He reported that he had tried to spend the last few years getting to know his kids. He reported spending a lot of time with children, getting involved in their lives. Hobbies were reported as refurbishing his home, which he and his spouse spent time doing together. The Veteran reported that he had been in therapy and enjoyed it, finding the session enlightening. The examiner noted symptoms of anxiety, suspiciousness, panic attacks that occur weekly or less, chronic sleep impairment, mild memory loss, disturbances of motivation and mood, difficulty in establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships. Behavior observations were noted as thoughts logical and linear; denied suicidal or homicidal ideations; mood was fine, affect was appropriate. The examiner remarked that the Veteran's relationships with people in the world have gotten smaller. The examiner also noted that the Veteran was able to communicate, remember, and follow instructions; able to use judgment; some difficulty with concentration, interacting with coworkers, and connecting with others; he was assessed as being able to working in public in enclosed space; and work in a loosely supervised situation, requiring little interaction with the public. The Veteran was noted to be working on his house with wife and was capable of doing projects. A January 2020 VA treatment records shows that the Veteran felt his mood was stable. A March 2020 VA treatment records shows that the Veteran's psychiatric system was assessed with negative results for depression, anxiety, and suicidal or homicidal ideations. August 1, 2011 to March 3, 2013 After a review of the evidence of record, the Board finds that an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for service connected PTSD from August 1, 2011 to March 3, 2013 is not warranted. The evidence does not reflect that the Veteran's PTSD has manifested with more severe manifestations that more nearly approximate occupational and social impairment with an 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). While the Veteran was taking medication for his insomnia, there is no evidence to show that his sleep difficulties resulted in occupational and social impairment that would warrant the next higher rating of 30 percent. The Board notes that the predischarge examination report in May 2011 noted no psychiatric conditions and that the Veteran had normal behavior. Therefore, the Board finds that the evidence does not more nearly approximate the criteria for a rating of 30 percent and a rating greater than 10 percent is denied. March 4, 2013 to October 26, 2014 After a review of the evidence of record the Board finds that from March 4, 2013 to October 26, 2014, the preponderance of the evidence is against a rating in excess of 50 percent for service connected PTSD. During this period on appeal symptoms were noted as h agitated mood, sleep disturbances, hypervigilance, uneasiness, and episodes of a quick heartbeat which made it hard for him to concentrate during the day. The Veteran reported a good relationship with his spouse and children, although it was reported his children had been upset after talking with the Veteran. The Veteran also reported that he and his spouse were remodeling a home. The Veteran felt uneasy and on guard most times that made his heartbeat quickly which made it hard for him to concentrate during the day. The Board also noted that the September 2014 VA mental health treatment note assessed the Veteran with moderate symptoms of PTSD, adjustment disorder with disturbances of mood, and insomnia. The evidence during this period on appeal does not show deficiencies in most areas or symptoms such 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. The Veteran's assessed symptoms of sleep impairments and disturbances of mood are not of a similar severity, frequency, and duration to the effects of the symptoms to warrant a 70 percent evaluation. See Bankhead v. Shulkin, 29 Vet. App. 10, 22 (2017); Vazquez-Claudio v. Shinseki, 713 F.3d 112, 114 (Fed. Cir. 2013). Thus, the preponderance of the evidence is against a finding that a 70 percent is warranted; and higher ratings are not warranted during this period on appeal. From October 27, 2014 After review of the Veteran's evidence, the Board finds that as of October 27, 2014, the Veteran's PTSD symptomatology do not approximate the criteria for a 100 percent rating. Here, the evidence shows that the Veteran's PTSD causes severe impairment. The Veteran was assessed with increased symptomatology to including symptoms as chronic sleep impairment, flattened affect, disturbances of motivation and mood, mild memory loss, anxiety, suspiciousness, panic attacks that occur weekly or less, difficulty in establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships. However, the evidence does not show total social and occupational impairment. For example, the Veteran reported that his marriage was good and he was involved in the life of his two children. He also reported that he and his spouse were remodeling a home together. The Board finds that this is evidence to show that total social and occupational impairment is not caused by his PTSD. The Veteran's PTSD causes significant social and occupational impairment. However, the current 70 percent rating contemplates an inability to establish and maintain effective relationships. As such, the aforementioned family contacts, and his ability to manage his daily life clearly preclude the assignment of a total schedular rating, and the claimed for a rating in excess of 70 percent must be denied. In short, the preponderance of the evidence weighs against finding that the severity, frequency, and duration of the Veteran's psychiatric symptoms have resulted in the level of impairment required for a 100 percent rating. The criteria for a 100 percent rating are not met, and this appeal must be denied. 2. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) due to service-connected disabilities prior to March 4, 2013 and from November 10, 2014 The Veteran has been awarded TDIU effective March 4, 2013 to November 9, 2014. As of November 10, 2014, the Veteran's combined rating is 100 percent based multiple service connected disabilities. The RO noted that the issue of a TDIU was moot as of November 10, 2014, as this was the date that the Veteran's service-connected disabilities combined to a 100 percent schedular rating. The Veteran contends that TDIU should be warranted prior to November 10, 2014 back to the date of his retirement of August 1, 2011, as his contention was that he was forced to retire due to his service connected disabilities. In this case the Board finds that a TDIU must still be considered from November 10, 2014, forward, (for example, due to PTSD with insomnia alone) in order to potentially make the Veteran eligible for special monthly compensation. See Bradley v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 280 (2008) (holding that there could be a situation where a Veteran has a schedular total rating for a particular service-connected disability, and could establish a TDIU rating for another service-connected disability in order to qualify for special monthly compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1114(s) by having an "additional" disability of 60 percent or more ("housebound rate")). A total disability rating may be granted where the schedular rating is less than 100 percent and the veteran is unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation as a result of service-connected disabilities. Generally, to be eligible for a TDIU, a percentage threshold must be met. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.340, 3.341, 4.16(a). A TDIU may be assigned when the disabled person is, in the judgment of the rating agency, unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation as a result of their service-connected disabilities. 38 C.F.R. § 4.16 (a). If there is only one such disability, it must be rated as at least 60-percent disabling, and if there are two or more disabilities, at least one disability must be rated as at least 40-percent disabling and there must be sufficient additional disability to bring the combined rating to at least 70 percent. Id. For the above purpose of one 60 percent disability, or one 40 percent disability in combination, the following will be considered as one disability: (1) disabilities of one or both upper extremities, or of one or both lower extremities, including the bilateral factor, if applicable, (2) disabilities resulting from common etiology or a single accident, (3) disabilities affecting a single body system, e.g. orthopedic, digestive, respiratory, cardiovascular-renal, neuropsychiatric, (4) multiple injuries incurred in action, or (5) multiple disabilities incurred as a prisoner of war. Id. Prior to March 4, 2013, the Veteran's service connected disabilities were primary insomnia rated at 10 percent; right carpal tunnel syndrome rated at 30 percent; left carpel tunnel syndrome rated at 20 percent; right shoulder disability rated at 10 percent; tinnitus rated at 10 percent; irritable bowel syndrome rated at 10 percent; right cheek scar rated 10 percent; herpes simplex rated 10 percent; right lower extremity neuralgia due to hernia residuals rated at 10 percent; and additional various noncompensable ratings. The Veteran's combined ratings prior the March 4, 2013 is 80 percent. A May 2011 VA predischarge examination reported noted that the Veteran had served in the Navy from July 1990 and would retire in August 2011 and was last assigned as a communications officer. A July 2012 VA general disability benefits questionnaire DBQ shows that the Veteran did not have any additional conditions that impacted his ability to work that were not addressed on other questionnaires. The Veteran did not wish to be examined for any other condition except for his inguinal hernia. Pain was reported distal to infraumbilical incision and in midline, pain in right ilioinguinal crease. Functional impact was reported by the examiner as limited ability to drive a car one hour before he would need to stop car due to pain in lower abdomen and take a rest break, remove seat belt and walk around for several minutes, limited to lifting objects weighing approximately 30 pound as pain in groin would onset and at 40 pounds he would have to stop lifting due to discomfort. A February 2013 VA treatment record shows that the Veteran reported shoulder and knee pain. Current level of functioning was noted as right shoulder pain with lifting and overhead activity and knee pain with stairs. He was noted to be independent with activities of daily living and ambulation. The Veteran was noted to be retired and was working on renovating his home. He exercised on elliptical and would run. A March 2016 Application for Increased Compensation based on Unemployability shows the Veteran reported he became too disabled to work on August 1, 2011, which was the date of his retirement from the Navy. The Veteran reported he has not tried to obtain employment since he became too disabled to work. The Veteran reported he was a college graduate. He reported that his disabilities of post-herniorrhaphy neurologia of the right lower extremity and inguinal hernia as well as the combined affects from his service connected disabilities prevented him from being employed. After a review of the evidence of record, the Board finds that prior to March 4, 2013 a TDIU is not warranted as evidence does not establish that the Veteran's service-connected disabilities have rendered him unemployable. While the evidence shows that the Veteran has not worked since August 1, 2011, there is simply no evidence to show that his service connected disability rendered him unable to gain and maintain substantial employment. The July 2012 DBQ shows that impairments would be limited ability to drive a car one hour before he would need to stop car due to pain in lower abdomen and take a rest break, remove seat belt and walk around for several minutes, limited to lifting objects weighing approximately 30 pounds as pain in groin would onset and at 40 pounds he would have to stop lifting due to discomfort. Additionally, limitations were noted from his shoulder and knee disabilities resulting in pain with lifting and overhead activity and knee pain with stairs. He was noted to be independent with activities of daily living and ambulation. However, despite these physical impairments that Veteran was remodeling his home which required manual labor. The Board finds that while these impairment were significant there is nothing to show that these symptoms prevented the Veteran from gainful employment. In the May 2015 VA PTSD DBQ, the Veteran reported that his educational credentials consisted of earning two Bachelors of Sciences degrees while in the Navy in Mathematics/Computer Science and Physics. He also reported earning a master's degree in oceanography, antisubmarine warfare, and systems technology. He reported working in the field of nuclear power plant in submarines and surface ships during his active service. The Board notes that there is no evidence to show that the Veteran's service connected disabilities have prevented the Veteran from working in the fields for which is has attained college degrees such as mathematics, computer science for physics, system technology, or oceanography. While the Veteran did experience impairment from insomnia, there is no opinion or evidence showing that this condition affected is ability to participate in gainful employment prior the March 4, 2013. For the foregoing reasons, the Board concludes that the preponderance of the evidence is against a finding of entitlement to a TDIU prior to March 4, 2013, the benefit-of-the-doubt rule is not for application, and the claim must be denied. For the period as November 10, 2014, the Veteran has been granted a combined 100 percent rating. However, a grant of a 100 percent disability does not always render the issue of TDIU moot. VA's duty to maximize a claimant's benefits includes consideration of whether his disabilities establishes entitlement to special monthly compensation (SMC) under 38 U.S.C. § 1114. See Buie v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 242, 250 (2011); Bradley v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 280, 294 (2008). (Continued on the next page) Specifically, SMC may be warranted if the Veteran has a 100 percent disability rating for a single disability, and VA finds that TDIU is warranted based solely on the disabilities other than the disability that is rated at 100 percent. See Bradley, 22 Vet. App. at 294. In this case, however, the Veteran does not have a single disability rated 100 percent disabling, but rather a 100 percent combined rating based on multiple disabilities and there is no indication that any one disability renders the Veteran unemployable. Thus, there is no basis for assignment of SMC per § 1114 (s). SONJA S. AN Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Dworkin, 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.