Citation Nr: 21041828 Decision Date: 07/10/21 Archive Date: 07/10/21 DOCKET NO. 16-60 253 DATE: July 10, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities (TDIU) for the entire period on appeal is granted. FINDING OF FACT For the entire period on appeal, the Veteran has had a combined rating of at least 70 percent, with at least one disability rated at 40 percent or more, and his service-connected disabilities have prevented him from obtaining and maintaining substantially gainful employment. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to a TDIU have been met for the entire period on appeal. 38 U.S.C. § 1155 (2018); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.340, 3.341, 4.16 (2020). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active military service from June 1965 to June 1967, including service in the Republic of Vietnam. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a September 2014 rating decision issued by the VA Regional Office (RO). By way of history, the Veteran was denied entitlement to service connection for residual disability of a head injury, to include traumatic brain injury (TBI), and entitlement to a TDIU in a November 2018 Board decision. The Veteran appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In October 2019, the Court granted a Joint Motion of the parties, vacated the Board's decision, and remanded the case to the Board for action consistent with the Joint Motion. In May 2020, the Board remanded the case for additional development. Subsequently, in a March 2021 rating decision the RO granted entitlement to service connection for TBI, which constitutes a full grant of the benefits sought on appeal. Thus, that matter is no longer in appellate status. The TDIU claim currently on appeal has been returned to the Board for further appellate action. The Veteran has reported that his service-connected disabilities have prevented him from securing or following any substantial gainful occupation. For the entire period on appeal, the Veteran's combined rating has been at least 70 percent, with at least one disability rated at least 40 percent. Therefore, the Board finds that the Veteran has met the schedular criteria for assignment of a TDIU for the entire period on appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 4.16. Additionally, the evidence of record reflects that the Veteran has been unable to secure and follow any substantially gainful employment due to his service-connected disabilities. In this regard, the Veteran stated that he became too disabled to work in February 2009, at which time his service-connected disabilities prevented him from obtaining and maintaining any form of gainful employment consistent with education and occupational experience. In this regard, he reported that he had two years of college and worked full-time as a shipping and receiving section leader for a metal products company for approximately 22 years. He related that his service-connected posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) impacted his ability to sleep, concentrate, and perform his job and that he was "being forced to leave the workforce." He added that his service-connected tension headaches, stress, inability to deal with any pressure, and wanting to avoid confrontation or worse led to his resignation. The Veteran's former employer shared that the Veteran had approximately four months of time lost during the 12 months preceding his last date of employment due to disability. He reportedly performed a period of part-time work for the metal products company, and subsequently retired for health reasons in June 2011. The Veteran underwent a private clinical interview in December 2013. The psychologist concluded that the Veteran could not obtain or maintain substantially gainful employment due to PTSD. He indicated that the Veteran had total occupational and social impairment with symptoms such as disturbed motivation, chronic sleep impairment, hypervigilance and OCD behaviors, panic attacks, memory impairment, irritability, difficulty adapting to stressful circumstances, hallucinations, and difficulty establishing and maintaining effective social relationships. At a July 2014 VA PTSD examination, the Veteran commented that he frequently became stressed at work because "every time [he turned] around... they were trying to push the older people out [and] would find anything wrong." He added that he had not had any regular employment since except "an odd job here and there." The examiner stated that the Veteran's PTSD and agoraphobia presented significant impairment in his ability to function away from home. Additionally, the examiner noted that the Veteran had significant difficulties with "normal" social interaction and would likely do better in situations requiring minimum interaction with others. In April 2016, a VA examiner indicated that the Veteran's service-connected headaches impacted his ability to work. Specifically, he experienced daily headaches lasting 30 minutes to 2 hours. He used medications and had to lay down and relax in a dark quiet room due to his sensitivity to light and sound. Based on the subjective report of the Veteran and the objective findings in the VA examination reports and December 2013 private clinical interview, the Board finds that the Veteran's service-connected disabilities significantly impact his ability to function in an occupational setting. His PTSD and headaches resulted in impaired concentration, difficulty adapting to stressful circumstances, and difficulty interacting with others which were critical functions for the Veteran's previous work. In light of the Veteran's employment history and the functional limitations described above, the Board finds that he is unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation in accordance with his industrial experience and education level. Therefore, resolving reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Board finds that entitlement to TDIU is warranted for the entire period on appeal. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b) (2018); Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). Kristin Haddock Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Ware, 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.