POSTTRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER (PTSD)

Summary

The Veteran, who served in the United States Marine Corps from August 1991 to November 1998, appeals a March 2025 rating decision that granted service connection for PTSD with a 30 percent rating. The Veteran sought a higher rating, asserting that his PTSD symptoms were more severe than initially assessed. The Board reviewed the evidence of record as of the March 2025 decision, noting that treatment records from the Omaha VAMC occurred after this date and were therefore not considered. The Veteran's claim for PTSD was initially filed in November 2024. The Board considered the Veteran's lay statements and a December 2024 VA PTSD examination. The lay statements described symptoms including avoidance of crowds, panic attacks, anxiety, irritability, memory issues, and sleep disturbances. The VA examination noted a diagnosis of PTSD with symptoms such as anxiety, suspiciousness, chronic sleep impairment, and mild memory loss, leading to occasional decreases in work efficiency and intermittent inability to perform occupational tasks. The Board found that the Veteran's symptoms, including flattened affect, disturbances in motivation and mood, panic attacks, hypervigilance, irritability, memory impairment, and difficulty with concentration, met the criteria for a 50 percent rating. Resolving all reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, the Board granted an initial rating of 50 percent for PTSD. The Board determined that a higher rating was not warranted as the evidence did not demonstrate deficiencies in most areas of social and occupational functioning, nor did it show more severe symptoms like suicidal ideation or gross impairment of thought processes. The Veteran remains employed and has a stable marriage, indicating some level of functioning.

Rationale

Symptoms align with 50% criteria (flattened affect, mood disturbances, panic attacks, hypervigilance, irritability, memory/concentration issues); Resolving doubt in Veteran's favor allows for higher rating; Higher rating not warranted due to continued social/occupational functioning and stable marriage/employment

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: A26034053
Decision Date: 04/14/26	Archive Date: 04/14/26

DOCKET NO. 250629-560710
DATE: April 14, 2026

ORDER

Entitlement to an initial rating of 50 percent, but no higher, for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is granted.

FINDING OF FACT

Resolving all doubt in the Veteran's favor, his PTSD has been manifested by no more than occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity throughout the appeal period; deficiencies in most areas have not been shown.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for an initial 50 percent rating, but no higher, for PTSD have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.7, 4.10, 4.21, 4.126, 4.130, Diagnostic Code (DC) 9411.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Marine Corps from August 1991 to November 1998.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2025 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO), which granted the claim for service connection and assigned a rating of 30 percent. 

In the June 2025 VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement), the Veteran elected the Direct Review docket.

Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the March 2025 agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ/RO) decision on appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.301. Any evidence submitted after the AOJ/RO decision on appeal cannot be considered by the Board. 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.300, 20.301, 20.801. 

The Board notes that the Veteran sought treatment at the Omaha VAMC, however, such treatment occurred after the March 2025 rating decision. As such, the Board did not review or consider the treatment records.

If the Veteran would like VA to consider any evidence that was submitted that the Board could not consider, the Veteran may file a Supplemental Claim (VA Form 20-0995) and submit or identify this evidence. 38 C.F.R. § 3.2501. If the evidence is new and relevant, VA will issue another decision on the claim, considering the new evidence in addition to the evidence previously considered. Id. Specific instructions for filing a Supplemental Claim are included with this decision. 

By way of procedural background, the Veteran initially submitted a claim for service connection in November 2024, which included a claim for posttraumatic stress disorder. A rating decision was issued in March 2025, which granted the claim and assigned a rating of 30 percent from the date of claim.  

The Veteran timely submitted a notice of disagreement (10182/NOD) in June 2025, seeking review of the claim. As such, the claim for an initial rating in excess of 30 percent for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is properly before the Board for adjudication. 

The Board acknowledges that 38 C.F.R. § 20.202 (c)(2) provides that an appellant may modify a notice of disagreement (NOD) and change Board dockets by submitting a new NOD within one year of notification of the decision on appeal or within 60 days of the date that the Board received the original NOD, whichever is later. The Veteran was notified of the March 2025 rating decision in a March 25, 2025 letter. The Board received the Veteran's 10182/NOD on June 29, 2025. Accordingly, the Veteran had until March 25, 2026, one year from the rating decision; or until August 28, 2025, 60 days from when VA received the Veteran's appeal to the Board. Accordingly, the time has elapsed to select a different Board review option. See Williams v. McDonough, No. 21-7363, U.S. Vet. App. June 21, 2024. As such, the Board will proceed with its review. 

Increased Disability Ratings Laws and Regulations

Disability evaluations are determined by evaluating the extent to which a Veteran's service-connected disability adversely affects his ability to function under the ordinary conditions of daily life, including employment, by comparing his symptomatology with the criteria set forth in the Schedule for Rating Disabilities (Rating Schedule). 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 
28, 2025, 60 days from when VA received the Veteran's appeal to the Board. Accordingly, the time has elapsed to select a different Board review option. See Williams v. McDonough, No. 21-7363, U.S. Vet. App. June 21, 2024. As such, the Board will proceed with its review. 

Increased Disability Ratings Laws and Regulations

Disability evaluations are determined by evaluating the extent to which a Veteran's service-connected disability adversely affects his ability to function under the ordinary conditions of daily life, including employment, by comparing his symptomatology with the criteria set forth in the Schedule for Rating Disabilities (Rating Schedule). 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.1, 4.2, 4.10. Separate diagnostic codes identify the various disabilities. 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. Part 4. Each disability must be viewed in relation to its history, and the limitation of activity imposed by the disabling condition should be emphasized. 38 C.F.R. § 4.1. Examination reports are to be interpreted in light of the whole recorded history, and each disability must be considered from the point of view of a veteran working or seeking work. 38 C.F.R. § 4.2. Reasonable doubt will be resolved in the claimant's favor. 38 C.F.R. § 4.3. Where there is a question as to which of two ratings shall be applied, the higher rating is assigned if the disability picture more nearly approximates the criteria required for that rating. Otherwise, the lower rating is assigned. 38 C.F.R. § 4.7.

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. Staged ratings are appropriate when the evidence establishes that the claimed disability manifested symptoms that would warrant different ratings for distinct time periods during the appeal. Hart v. Mansfield, 21 Vet. App. 505, 509- 10 (2007).

In rendering a decision on appeal, the Board must also analyze the credibility and probative value of the evidence, account for the evidence which it finds to be persuasive or unpersuasive and provide the reasons for its rejection of any material evidence favorable to the claimant. Gabrielson v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 36, 39-40 (1994); Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 57 (1990). Competency of evidence differs from weight and credibility. Competency is a legal concept determining whether testimony may be heard and considered by the trier of fact, while credibility is a factual determination going to the probative value of the evidence to be made after the evidence has been admitted. Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 469 (1994); see also Cartright v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 24, 25 (1991) ("although interest may affect the credibility of testimony, it does not affect competency to testify").

Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 30 percent for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

The Veteran asserts that a higher rating is warranted for his service-connected PTSD. Specifically, the Veteran asserts that "While reviewing with therapist, this a bigger problem than expected." See June 2025 NOD. 

The Veteran has been assigned a rating of 30 percent rating for his service-connected PTSD, which is evaluated under Diagnostic Code (DC) 9411. 38 C.F.R. § 4.130.

Disability ratings are determined by applying the criteria set forth in VA's Schedule for Rating Disabilities. The percentage ratings are based on the average impairment of earning capacity and individual disabilities are assigned separate diagnostic codes. 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. § 4.1. If two evaluations are potentially applicable, the higher evaluation will be assigned if the disability picture more nearly approximates the criteria required for that evaluation; otherwise, the lower rating will be assigned. 38 C.F.R. § 4.7. Any reasonable doubt regarding a degree of disability will be resolved in favor of the veteran. 38 C.F.R. § 4.3.

Under Diagnostic Code 9411, a 30 percent rating is assigned when symptoms such as depressed mood, anxiety, suspiciousness, panic attacks (weekly or less often), chronic sleep impairment, or mild memory loss (such as forgetting names, directions, or recent events), cause occupational and social impairment
; 38 C.F.R. § 4.1. If two evaluations are potentially applicable, the higher evaluation will be assigned if the disability picture more nearly approximates the criteria required for that evaluation; otherwise, the lower rating will be assigned. 38 C.F.R. § 4.7. Any reasonable doubt regarding a degree of disability will be resolved in favor of the veteran. 38 C.F.R. § 4.3.

Under Diagnostic Code 9411, a 30 percent rating is assigned when symptoms such as depressed mood, anxiety, suspiciousness, panic attacks (weekly or less often), chronic sleep impairment, or mild memory loss (such as forgetting names, directions, or recent events), cause occupational and social impairment with occasional decrease in work efficiency and intermittent periods of inability to perform occupational tasks (although generally functioning satisfactorily, with routine behavior, self-care, and normal conversation).

A 50 percent rating is assigned for 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; and difficulty in establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships. 38 C.F.R. § 4.130 

A 70 percent disability rating is assigned 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 that is 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); and inability to establish and maintain effective relationships. 38 C.F.R. § 4.130.

A 100 percent disability rating is assigned 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 personal hygiene); disorientation to time or place; and memory loss for names of close relatives, or for the veteran's own occupation or name. 38 C.F.R. § 4.130

Under the General Formula, the Board must conduct a "holistic analysis" that considers all associated symptoms, regardless of whether they are listed as criteria. Bankhead v. Shulkin, 29 Vet. App. 10, 22 (2017); 38 C.F.R. § 4.130. The Board must determine whether unlisted symptoms are similar in severity, frequency, and duration to the listed symptoms associated with specific disability percentages. Then, the Board must determine whether the associated symptoms, both listed and unlisted, caused the level of impairment required for a higher disability rating. Vazquez-Claudio v. Shinseki, 713 F.3d 112, 114-118 (Fed. Cir. 2013).

In determining the level of impairment under 38 C.F.R. § 4.130, a rating specialist is not restricted to the symptoms provided under the diagnostic code and should consider all symptoms which affect occupational and social impairment, including those identified in the DIAGNOSTIC AND STATISTICAL MANUAL OF MENTAL DISORDERS (DSM 5). See Mauerhan v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 436 (2002). If the evidence demonstrates that a claimant suffers symptoms or effects that cause an occupational or social impairment equivalent to those listed in that diagnostic code, the appropriate, equivalent rating is assigned. See id.

Turning to the evidence, the Board notes the evidence does not include any treatment prior to the March 2025 rating decision. 

In November 2024, the Veteran filed his claim for service connection and submitted a VA Form 21-4138 Statement in Support of Claim. He indicated that since service he had become quiet and reserved and had lost interest in what he once enjoyed. He stated that he avoided fireworks, loud noises, and crowds. He described experiencing panic attacks and anxiety and that he relived his traumatic event in distressing memories at least once a week. He described being hypervigilant and easily angered/irritable. He stated he had trouble remembering work tasks, household chores, and errands and had to keep lists. In addition, he described trouble falling asleep and staying asleep. He
 treatment prior to the March 2025 rating decision. 

In November 2024, the Veteran filed his claim for service connection and submitted a VA Form 21-4138 Statement in Support of Claim. He indicated that since service he had become quiet and reserved and had lost interest in what he once enjoyed. He stated that he avoided fireworks, loud noises, and crowds. He described experiencing panic attacks and anxiety and that he relived his traumatic event in distressing memories at least once a week. He described being hypervigilant and easily angered/irritable. He stated he had trouble remembering work tasks, household chores, and errands and had to keep lists. In addition, he described trouble falling asleep and staying asleep. He indicated that he took Trazodone to help with his symptoms. He also indicated he had been married for 22 years.

The Veteran was afforded a December 2024 VA PTSD examination. The VA examiner noted a diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The VA examiner noted the Veteran had occupational and social impairment with occasional decrease in work efficiency and intermittent periods of inability to perform occupational tasks, although generally functioning satisfactorily, with normal routine behavior, self-care and conversation. The Veteran reported he lived with his wife of 22 years and his two adult children. The Veteran described his marriage as "great," but acknowledged some "rough parts." During the summertime, the Veteran reported some socialization with fellow campers. Regarding his employment, the Veteran reported he had been employed in IT since his discharge, his longest employment had been with a single employer for 16 years and he was currently employed as an IT director. 

At his December 2024 VA PTSD examination, the Veteran reported he slept four to six hours per night with sleep disturbances that included difficulty staying asleep and nightmares, had intrusive memories, anger, irritability, guilt, hypervigilance, avoidance behaviors, and difficulty with focus/concentration. The Veteran reported he started using cannabis around 2018 to 2022 for sleep, then began using prescription medication. The Veteran reported using cannabis about twice a year. 

The December 2024 VA examiner noted the Veteran had symptoms of anxiety, suspiciousness, chronic sleep impairment and mild memory loss, such as forgetting names, directions or recent events. The examiner noted that the Veteran was oriented to person, place, time and event; motor behavior was normal; mood was euthymic; affect was congruent; speech volume and rate was within normal limits; thought content was normal; thought process was linear; and the Veteran denied any current auditory or visual hallucinations and suicidal or homicidal ideations. The Veteran was considered capable of managing his financial affairs.

Upon review of the record, the Board finds that any doubt can be resolved to find that the Veteran's impairment more nearly approximated occupational and social impairment, with reduced reliability and productivity, based on his lay statements and the VA examination of record. 

The evidence demonstrates flattened effect and disturbances of motivation and mood, including panic attacks, hypervigilance, irritability, impairment of memory., and difficulty with focus/concentration which fall within the criteria listed for a 50 percent rating. Socially, the Veteran avoids certain situations, including crowds, and experiences anxiety and hypervigilance that impact his ability to socialize. Occupationally, the Veteran has trouble remembering work tasks and experiences difficulty with focus and concentration. Although many of the symptoms described by the Veteran fit within the 30 percent criteria, the Board recognizes that any reasonable doubt regarding a degree of disability will be resolved in favor of the veteran. 38 C.F.R. § 4.3. Here, resolution of doubt in his favor allows the Board to grant a higher rating of 50 percent.

Although a 50 percent rating is warranted throughout the appeal period, the Board further finds that an evaluation in excess of 50 percent is not warranted for the Veteran's PTSD at any point. A higher rating would be warranted for occupational and social impairment with deficiencies in most areas. The above-referenced evidence does not show that the frequency, severity, and duration of the Veteran's psychiatric symptoms resulted in social and occupational impairment that more nearly approximates the criteria for a 70 percent or higher rating. The evidence demonstrates that the Veteran is capable of social interaction and occupational functioning. The Veteran has been in a 22-year, stable marriage, and continues to be employed full time. In addition, absent from the record are more severe symptoms impacting the ability to function independently, to include obsessive rituals that interfere with routine, spacial disorientation, neglect of hygiene, suicidal or homicidal ideation, or gross impairment of thought process or communication. For these reasons, the Board finds that an evaluation in excess of 50 percent is not warranted.

Based on the foregoing, any doubt is resolved to grant an initial rating of 50 percent, but no higher, for
 occupational impairment that more nearly approximates the criteria for a 70 percent or higher rating. The evidence demonstrates that the Veteran is capable of social interaction and occupational functioning. The Veteran has been in a 22-year, stable marriage, and continues to be employed full time. In addition, absent from the record are more severe symptoms impacting the ability to function independently, to include obsessive rituals that interfere with routine, spacial disorientation, neglect of hygiene, suicidal or homicidal ideation, or gross impairment of thought process or communication. For these reasons, the Board finds that an evaluation in excess of 50 percent is not warranted.

Based on the foregoing, any doubt is resolved to grant an initial rating of 50 percent, but no higher, for the Veteran's PTSD. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102.  In coming to this conclusion, the Board has carefully considered and applied the benefit of the doubt.

 

C.B. Iwanowski

Acting Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Melnyk, H.        

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.