DEGENERATIVE ARTHRITIS OF THE SPINE (SPONDYLOSIS)

KRISTI L. GUNN · 2026 · Case ID: A26040046

GRANTED

Summary

The Veteran, who served in the United States Marine Corps from June 1976 to June 1979, appeals the denial of service connection for a lumbar spine disability and entitlement to Total Disability based on Individual Unemployability (TDIU). The Veteran claimed his lumbar spine issues, including degenerative disc disease and lumbar strain, resulted from in-service injuries, specifically during physical training and a 1978 motor vehicle accident. The Board found that the Veteran's current lumbar spine disability is related to an in-service injury, granting service connection. This decision was supported by the Veteran's consistent lay testimony, corroborated by fellow servicemembers' statements and service treatment records documenting the 1978 accident and subsequent treatment. Although some medical opinions were deemed inadequate or conclusory, a favorable opinion from the Veteran's treating physician, S.C., M.D., was given significant weight for its thorough rationale. The Board also granted entitlement to TDIU, finding that the combined effects of the Veteran's service-connected orthopedic and psychiatric disabilities preclude him from substantially gainful employment. The Veteran's work history in physically demanding jobs, coupled with significant physical limitations and psychiatric impairments including social isolation and impaired concentration, supported this TDIU grant. The Board noted that while the combined disabilities lead to unemployability, no single disability alone met the criteria for TDIU.

Rationale

Favorable finding of current disability by AOJ; Credible and probative lay testimony and buddy statements corroborating in-service injury; Favorable opinion from treating physician with reasoned explanation

Service Branch

MARINE CORPS

Special Benefit

TDIU

Docket No.

210913-184438

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: A26040046
Decision Date: 04/29/26 Archive Date: 04/29/26

DOCKET NO. 210913-184438
DATE: April 29, 2026

ORDER

Entitlement to service connection for a lumbar spine disability, diagnosed as degenerative disc disease (DDD) and lumbar strain, is granted.

Entitlement to a total disability rating based upon individual unemployability (TDIU) due to the Veteran's service-connected disabilities is granted.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, he sustained an in-service lumbar spine injury. His current lumbar spine disability is related to that in-service injury.

2. The Veteran meets the schedular criteria for a TDIU, and he is unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation as a result of his service-connected disabilities.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for a lumbar spine disability have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304, 3.307, 3.309.

2. The criteria for entitlement to a TDIU based on the Veteran's service-connected disabilities have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.340, 3.341, 4.3, 4.16(a).

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

The Veteran served in the United States Marine Corps from June 1976 to June 1979.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2020 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).

In September 2021, the Veteran submitted VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement), electing the Hearing docket. A Board hearing was held on May 14, 2025. See the May 2025 hearing transcript.

Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the December 2020 agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) decision on appeal, as well as any evidence submitted by the Veteran or representative at the hearing or within 90 days following the hearing. 38 C.F.R. § 20.302(a). If evidence was submitted either (1) during the period after the AOJ issued the decision on appeal and prior to the Board hearing, or (2) more than 90 days following the hearing, the Board did not consider it in its decision. 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.300, 20.302(a), 20.801.

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 claims, considering the new evidence in addition to the evidence previously considered. Id. Specific instructions for filing a Supplemental Claim are included with this decision.

1. Service connection for a lumbar spine disability is granted.

The Veteran seeks service connection for a lumbar spine disability, to include degenerative disc disease (DDD) and lumbar strain, which he contends is the result of in-service injuries, including physical training consistent with his military occupational specialty (MOS) as a rifleman and a 1978 motor vehicle accident. See September 2004 Statement in Support of Claim; December 2015 correspondence; May 2025 hearing transcript.

Applicable Law

Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from a disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Establishing service connection requires evidence of: (1) a current disability; (2) an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the current disability and the in-service disease or injury. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166-67 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence on any issue material to the claim, reasonable doubt is resolved in the claimant's favor. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; Lynch v.
38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Establishing service connection requires evidence of: (1) a current disability; (2) an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the current disability and the in-service disease or injury. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166-67 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence on any issue material to the claim, reasonable doubt is resolved in the claimant's favor. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; Lynch v. McDonough, 21 F.4th 776 (Fed. Cir. 2021) (en banc). If the evidence persuasively favors one side or the other, there is not an approximate balance, and therefore the benefit-of-the-doubt rule does not apply.

Factual Background

The AOJ favorably found that the Veteran has a current disability. The Board is bound by this favorable finding. 38 C.F.R. § 3.104(a). As such, the first element of service connection (a current disability) is satisfied. See Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

With respect to the second element (an in-service incurrence), the Veteran has consistently reported that he sustained a back injury following a field exercise and a motor vehicle accident, with back pain continuing since service. See generally December 2009 and August 2011 Statements in Support of Claim; July 2012 VA Examination; December 2015 Correspondence. At the May 2025 Board hearing, he again recounted these events and provided sworn testimony describing the in-service events, onset of symptoms, and their persistence since that time.

The Veteran is competent to report observable symptoms and events, such as back pain and injuries. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007). His statements and sworn hearing testimony are internally consistent and supported by the record; therefore, the Board finds them credible and probative. See Dalton v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 23, 38 (2007); Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498, 511 (1995), aff'd per curium, 78 F.3d 604 (Fed. Cir. 1996).

Service treatment records (STRs) corroborate the Veteran's statements, documenting treatment in February 1977 following a fall and confirm involvement in a June 1978 motor vehicle accident with resulting injuries and placement on limited duty.

Buddy statements from W.T. and G.C. further support the occurrence and severity of the 1978 motor vehicle accident, reporting that the vehicle flipped multiple times and the occupants were thrown within the vehicle. W.T. also recalled that the Veteran reported the onset of back pain immediately following the accident. These statements are competent, internally consistent, and consistent with the contemporaneous STRs documenting a motor vehicle accident in June 1978; thus, the Board finds them credible and probative. Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 469-71 (1994); Caluza, 7 Vet. App. at 511.

Although a February 1979 STR reflects treatment for a sore throat, cough, and back pain with full range of motion, this isolated finding does not outweigh the documented in-service injuries and the competent and credible lay evidence. Rather, it represents a snapshot in time and does not undermine the overall evidentiary picture.

Accordingly, the Board resolves reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor and finds that he sustained an in-service lumbar spine injury. Therefore, the second element of service connection is satisfied.

The remaining question is whether the Veteran's current lumbar spine disability is related to the in-service injury.

The record contains both favorable and unfavorable medical opinions addressing the nexus element.

The June 2012 VA examiner diagnosed lumbar strain, osteoarthritis, and DDD, but provided a negative nexus opinion based, in part, on the absence of documented in-service complaints. The Board has previously determined that this opinion is inadequate; accordingly, it is afforded no probative weight.

In October 2015, E.E., Ph.D., opined that the Veteran's low back condition began in service and worsened over time. However, because the opinion provides limited supporting rationale, it is afforded reduced probative weight. Stefl v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 120, 124 (2007). Similarly, a November 2015, opinion from Dr
opinions addressing the nexus element.

A subsequent VA opinion obtained following remand again provided a negative nexus opinion, relying primarily on the absence of a documented in-service injury and a normal 1987 MRI, and concluding that the Veteran's current back condition was less likely than not related to service. However, the opinion fails to address the documented 1977 and 1978 in-service injuries and, therefore, is based on an inaccurate factual premise. Accordingly, the Board affords this opinion diminished probative value. See Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295 (2008); see also Reonal v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 458, 461 (1993).

Following the Board hearing, the Veteran submitted additional medical evidence, including a November 2020 opinion that is unsigned and appears incomplete. Because the author cannot be verified and the rationale is conclusory, it is afforded no probative weight. [The Board notes that additional pages of this opinion may be missing and VA has not attempted to obtain the missing page(s), any deficiency in development is nonprejudicial, as the Board is granting the benefit sought in full. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.159.]

Another undated "November" opinion (provider name unreadable) similarly concludes that the Veteran's lumbar strain and DDD are more likely than not related to service. However, as the author cannot be verified and the opinion lacks a supporting rationale, it is afforded no probative value. Stefl, 21 Vet. App. at 124.

Finally, the Veteran submitted a favorable opinion from S.C., M.D., who has treated the Veteran since 2018. The physician reviewed the Veteran's medical history, including records dating back to service, and considered his lay reports. This provider concluded that the Veteran's lumbar spine disability is more likely than not related to an in-service injury in 1978 and explained that the condition is chronic and progressive. Because this opinion reflects familiarity with the Veteran's medical history, accounts for his lay statements, and provides a reasoned explanation consistent with the record, the Board affords it significant probative weight. Nieves-Rodriguez, 22 Vet. App. at 295.

Conclusion

The Board finds that the most probative evidence of record establishes that the Veteran's current lumbar spine disability is related to his in-service lumbar spine injury. Accordingly, entitlement to service connection for a lumbar spine disability is warranted, and the claim is granted. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a).

2. Entitlement to a TDIU is granted.

The Veteran contends that his service-connected disabilities preclude him from securing or following substantially gainful employment. See May 2025 private medical opinions from S.C., M.D., and November 2020 VA medical opinion.

Procedural History and Jurisdiction

As an initial matter, the issue of entitlement to a TDIU is properly before the Board as part and parcel of the underlying service connection claim. See Rice v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 447 (2009); see also Phillips v. McDonough, 37 Vet. App. 394 (2024); Green v. McDonough, 37 Vet. App. 127 (2024). Because TDIU was reasonably raised in connection with that claim, it shares the same appeal period.

By way of procedural history, the Veteran filed an informal claim to reopen his previously denied claim for a back disability on August 25, 2014. 38 C.F.R. § 3.155(a) (2014). In a June 2015 rating decision, the AOJ denied the claim. Within one year, the Veteran submitted a Notice of Disagreement and elected review by a Decision Review Officer (DRO). The AOJ continued the denial in an August 2019 Statement of the Case. In September 2019, the Veteran opted into the Appeals
37 Vet. App. 127 (2024). Because TDIU was reasonably raised in connection with that claim, it shares the same appeal period.

By way of procedural history, the Veteran filed an informal claim to reopen his previously denied claim for a back disability on August 25, 2014. 38 C.F.R. § 3.155(a) (2014). In a June 2015 rating decision, the AOJ denied the claim. Within one year, the Veteran submitted a Notice of Disagreement and elected review by a Decision Review Officer (DRO). The AOJ continued the denial in an August 2019 Statement of the Case. In September 2019, the Veteran opted into the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA) by filing a Notice of Disagreement and electing the Direct Review docket. In April 2020, the Board remanded the issue for additional development. Following that development, in the December 2020 rating decision on appeal, the AOJ again denied the claim. The Veteran timely appealed that decision, and the present appeal stems from that determination.

The Board finds that the Veteran has continuously pursued the claim since August 25, 2014. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.155(a) (2014), 3.2500(h). Because the Veteran asserts that his inability to work is due, in part, to his lumbar spine disability, TDIU has been reasonably raised by the record as part of the underlying service connection claim. See Rice, 22 Vet. App. at 447. Accordingly, the appeal period for a TDIU begins on August 25, 2014.

Evidentiary Scope (Hearing Docket)

Because this appeal is on the Hearing docket, the Board may consider: (1) the evidence of record at the time of the December 18, 2020, rating decision on appeal; (2) evidence submitted at the May 14, 2025, Board hearing; and (3) evidence submitted within 90 days thereafter (i.e., through August 12, 2025).

The Board may, however, consider assigned disability ratings and combined evaluations outside of these evidentiary windows, as such determinations are legal findings rather than evidentiary submissions. Green, 37 Vet. App. at 127.

Applicable Law - TDIU

It is the well-established policy of VA that all Veterans who are unable to secure and follow a substantially gainful occupation by reason of service-connected disabilities shall be rated totally disabled. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a). Where the schedular rating is less than total, a total disability rating for compensation purposes may be assigned when the disabled person is unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation as a result of service-connected disabilities, provided that, if there is only one such disability, this disability shall be ratable at 60 percent or more, or if there are two or more disabilities, there shall be at least one disability ratable at 40 percent or more, and sufficient additional disability to bring the combined rating to 70 percent or more. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.340, 3.341, 4.16(a).

Entitlement to a total rating must be based solely on the impact of service-connected disabilities on the ability to secure and follow substantially gainful employment. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.340, 3.341, 4.16(a). In reaching such a determination, the central inquiry is "whether the veteran's service-connected disabilities alone are of sufficient severity to produce unemployability." Hatlestad v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 524, 529 (1993). Consideration may be given to the level of education, special training, and previous work experience in arriving at a conclusion. Individual unemployability, however, must be determined without regard to any nonservice-connected disabilities or advancing age. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.341(a), 4.16(a), 4.19; Van Hoose v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 361 (1993).

In Ray v. Wilkie, 31 Vet. App. 58 (2019), the Court provided a list of potentially relevant factors to be considered in determining whether a Veteran can secure and follow a substantially gainful occupation. The Court found that consideration of a Veteran's physical ability is necessary, with possible relevant factors including limitations as to lifting, bending, sitting, standing, walking, climbing, grasping, typing, and reaching, as well as audio and visual limitations. The Court also indicated that a decision on TDIU should address whether the Veteran has the mental ability to perform the activities required by the occupation at issue. Factors that may be
Van Hoose v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 361 (1993).

Schedular Criteria

The record reflects temporary periods of 100 percent schedular ratings, to include periods of special monthly compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1114(s), from February 1, 2016, to February 28, 2016, and from October 1, 2016, to November 30, 2016. Accordingly, entitlement to a TDIU is moot during those periods.

The Veteran is service-connected for multiple disabilities, including: major depressive disorder associated with degenerative arthritis first metatarsophalangeal joint hallux valgus, left great toe (also claimed as bilateral foot bunions/bilateral feet) rated at 50 percent disabling from May 11, 2011, 70 percent disabling from February 18, 2021; left knee patellofemoral syndrome rated at 0 percent disabling from June 6, 2011, 10 percent from April 21, 2014, 30 percent from December 20, 2021; right knee patellofemoral syndrome rated at 0 percent from June 6, 2011, 10 percent from June 4, 2014, 30 percent from December 20, 2021; osteoarthritis of the left AC joint, status post rotator cuff surgery rated at 20 percent from August 22, 2011, 100 percent from October 1, 2016, 20 percent from December 1, 2016; painful scar, status post metatarsal head osteotomy, right foot associated with degenerative arthritis first metatarsophalangeal joint with hallux valgus, right great toe (also claimed as bilateral foot bunions/bilateral feet) rated as 10 percent disabling from February 1, 2016; degenerative arthritis first metatarsophalangeal joint with hallux valgus, right great toe (also claimed as bilateral foot bunions/bilateral feet) rated 0 percent from October 13, 2009, 100 percent from February 1, 2016, 10 percent from March 1, 2016; mild instability, left knee, patellofemoral syndrome, associated with left knee patellofemoral syndrome rated 10 percent from July 17, 2019; hammer toes, right foot associated with degenerative arthritis first metatarsophalangeal joint with hallux valgus, right great toe (also claimed as bilateral foot bunions/bilateral feet) rated 0 percent from October 13, 2009, 10 percent from May 11, 2011, 0 percent from September 1, 2016, 10 percent from February 18, 2021; hammer toes, left foot associated with degenerative arthritis first metatarsophalangeal joint with hallux valgus, left great toe (also claimed as bilateral foot bunions/bilateral feet) rated 0 percent from October 13, 2009; 10 percent from May 11, 2011, 0 percent from September 1, 2016; 10 percent from February 18, 2021; degenerative arthritis first metatarsophalangeal joint with hallux valgus, left great toe (also claimed as bilateral foot bunions/bilateral feet) rated 0 percent from October 3, 2009; scars, status post left rotator cuff surgery associated with osteoarthritis of the left AC joint, status post rotator cuff surgery rated 0 percent from August 22, 2011; and scar, status post metatarsal head osteotomy, right foot associated with degenerative arthritis first metatarsophalangeal joint with hallux valgus, right great toe (also claimed as bilateral foot bunions/bilateral feet) 0 percent from February 1, 2016
2021; degenerative arthritis first metatarsophalangeal joint with hallux valgus, left great toe (also claimed as bilateral foot bunions/bilateral feet) rated 0 percent from October 3, 2009; scars, status post left rotator cuff surgery associated with osteoarthritis of the left AC joint, status post rotator cuff surgery rated 0 percent from August 22, 2011; and scar, status post metatarsal head osteotomy, right foot associated with degenerative arthritis first metatarsophalangeal joint with hallux valgus, right great toe (also claimed as bilateral foot bunions/bilateral feet) 0 percent from February 1, 2016. Based on these ratings, the Veteran has met the schedular criteria for a TDIU under 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a) since August 22, 2011, as he has had at least one disability rated 40 percent or more and a combined rating of at least 70 percent.

Factual Background

Having determined that the schedular criteria are met, the remaining question is whether the Veteran's service-connected disabilities, considered together, preclude substantially gainful employment consistent with his education and occupational history.

The record reflects that the Veteran has a high school education with no additional specialized training. See Medical Treatment Records - Furnished by SSA. His occupational history consists primarily of physically demanding labor, including employment as a garage truck driver, railroad trackman, corrections officer, and construction worker. Id. His DD Form 214 reflects a military occupational specialty of rifleman.

VA treatment records from June 2011 document bilateral foot pain, particularly with stair use. At a September 2011 VA examination, the examiner found that bilateral hallux valgus caused difficulty with prolonged standing and walking.

A July 2012 VA examination noted that the Veteran's shoulder disability limited overhead use and lifting, while his back symptoms impaired bending.

At a May 2013 VA mental disorders examination, the Veteran exhibited occupational and social impairment with symptoms including depressed mood, chronic sleep impairment, difficulty establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships, as well as suicidal ideation.

VA outpatient treatment records in September and October 2013 reflect worsening psychiatric symptoms, including auditory hallucinations, paranoia, distrust of others, violent thoughts and fear of acting on those thoughts, social isolation, and sleep disturbance, as well as increased pain.

From 2013 through 2014, VA outpatient treatment records consistently document psychosocial impairment, including distress, isolation, impaired sleep (as little as two hours at a time), irritability, and continued reports of hearing voices. In February 2014, the Veteran reported inability to tolerate others due to pain and endorsed persistent isolation and auditory hallucinations. A June 2014 VA examination further found that he could not perform prolonged weight-bearing activities or tasks requiring squatting or kneeling.

By July 2014, the Veteran required a walker for ambulation. A September 2014 examination documented limitations in reaching, repetitive arm movement, prolonged driving, and physical activity, as well as significant bilateral knee and foot impairment affecting standing, walking, kneeling, and squatting.

In April 2015, the Veteran was noted to have occupational and social impairment with occasional decrease in work efficiency and intermittent periods of inability to perform occupational tasks, and he reported minimal social interaction stating he spent most of his time "just sitting around."

VA outpatient treatment records from September 2016 continue to reflect limitations in prolonged walking and standing, and overhead reaching.

By June 2018, VA outpatient treatment records document increased isolation, significant fatigue, impaired concentration, passive suicidal ideations, and abnormal gait and posture.

A July 2019 VA examination confirms ongoing physical limitations, including difficulty with lifting, pushing, pulling, prolonged standing, and walking.

The record further shows that the Veteran has been in receipt of Social Security Administration (SSA) disability benefits since approximately 2018 due to his back and psychiatric symptoms. While SSA determinations are not binding on VA, they are probative evidence regarding the Veteran's functional impairment. See Collier v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 413 (1991). Notably, SSA found that the Veteran is unable to perform work-related activities due to both physical and psychiatric symptoms.

A May 2025 private medical opinion from Dr. S.C. concluded that the Veteran's chronic pain and psychiatric symptoms result in significant functional limitations, including reduced physical capacity and significant lifestyle modifications.

Additionally, in May 2025 the Veteran submitted an opinion dated November 2020 from a VA treatment provider who indicated that the Veteran's functional capacity is significantly limited, despite some independence in activities of daily living and that he is unable to maintain gainful employment due to the combined effects of his physical and mental conditions. The provider
Collier v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 413 (1991). Notably, SSA found that the Veteran is unable to perform work-related activities due to both physical and psychiatric symptoms.

Additionally, in May 2025 the Veteran submitted an opinion dated November 2020 from a VA treatment provider who indicated that the Veteran's functional capacity is significantly limited, despite some independence in activities of daily living and that he is unable to maintain gainful employment due to the combined effects of his physical and mental conditions. The provider also noted a longstanding history of social isolation. [Although the record suggests that additional pages of the November 2020 opinion may be missing and VA has not attempted to obtain the missing page(s), any deficiency in development is nonprejudicial, as the Board is granting the benefit sought in full. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.159.]

Analysis

The central inquiry in a claim for a TDIU is whether the Veteran's service-connected disabilities alone are of sufficient severity to preclude him from securing or following substantially gainful employment consistent with his education and occupational experience. 38 C.F.R. § 4.16; Ray, 31 Vet. App. at 58.

In this case, the Veteran's work history is limited to physically demanding occupations, and the record does not reflect skills that are readily transferable to sedentary employment. The Board must therefore consider both physical and non-exertional limitations.

The evidence demonstrates significant physical impairment due to service-connected orthopedic disabilities, including limitations in standing, walking, lifting, bending, kneeling, and repetitive use. These limitations would preclude the physical requirements of his prior occupations.

Additionally, the Veteran's service-connected psychiatric disability results in substantial non-exertional impairment, including impaired concentration, reduced reliability and productivity, difficulty interacting with others, social isolation, and chronic sleep impairment. These symptoms would significantly interfere with the ability to perform even sedentary employment that required sustained attention, regular attendance, and effective interpersonal functioning.

Importantly, both SSA findings and the November 2020 VA opinion, as well as the May 2025 private opinion, consistently attribute the Veteran's unemployability to the combined effects of his service-connected physical and psychiatric disabilities. The Board finds these opinions probative, as they are supported by the medical record and are consistent with the Veteran's documented functional limitations.

However, the evidence does not establish that any single service-connected disability, standing alone, is sufficient to render the Veteran unable to secure or follow substantially gainful employment. Rather, the record reflects that his unemployability results from the collective impact of multiple disabilities.

Accordingly, entitlement to a TDIU is warranted based on the combined effects of the Veteran's service-connected disabilities. However, because unemployability is not attributable to a single disability, entitlement to a TDIU based on one disability for purposes of SMC under 38 U.S.C. § 1114(s) is not warranted. Bradley, 22 Vet. App. at 280; Buie, 24 Vet. App. at 242.

Conclusion

Given the Veteran's education, work history in physically demanding labor, and the combined physical and psychiatric limitations imposed by his service-connected disabilities, the Board finds that he is unable to secure or follow substantially gainful employment.

Accordingly, entitlement to a TDIU is warranted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102.

(Continued on the next page)

However, entitlement to a TDIU based on a single disability for SMC purposes is not warranted.

KRISTI L. GUNN

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board Hatcher, Valerie

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.

Analyze in VA Law Explorer