POSTTRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDER (PTSD)

MATTHEW W. BLACKWELDER · 2026 · Case ID: A26040258

MIXED

Summary

The Veteran, who served from July 1969 to July 1973, appeals the denial of Total Disability based on Individual Unemployability (TDIU) and seeks a higher rating for his service-connected Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The Board granted a 70 percent rating for PTSD, finding that while the Veteran experiences significant symptoms including depression, anxiety, panic attacks, passive suicidal ideation, and difficulty adapting to stressful circumstances, these symptoms do not rise to the level of total occupational and social impairment required for a 100 percent rating. The Board noted the Veteran maintains family connections, engages in volunteer work at his campground, and has hobbies, indicating he can perform the mental and physical acts required for substantially gainful employment. The TDIU claim was denied because the preponderance of the evidence was against the Veteran's assertion of unemployability, despite his combined 80 percent rating. The Board found that while his service-connected disabilities negatively impacted his functioning, they did not render him unable to secure or follow substantially gainful employment consistent with his education and work history.

Rationale

Symptoms of depressed mood, anxiety, panic attacks, passive suicidal ideation, and difficulty adapting to stressful circumstances.; Occupational and social impairment with deficiencies in most areas.; Symptoms do not rise to the level of total occupational and social impairment required for a 100 percent rating.

Special Benefit

TDIU

Docket No.

250813-576975

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: A26040258
Decision Date: 04/29/26 Archive Date: 04/29/26

DOCKET NO. 250813-576975
DATE: April 29, 2026

ORDER

A 70 percent rating for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is granted as of August 11, 2023, subject to the laws and regulations governing the assignment of monetary benefits.

A total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities (TDIU) is denied.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. From August 11, 2023, the Veteran's symptoms caused by his PTSD more nearly approximated occupational and social impairment with deficiency in most areas, but total occupational and social impairment has not been shown.

2. The Veteran's service-connected disabilities do not render him unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation consistent with his education and work history.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. From August 11, 2023, the criteria for a rating of 70 percent for PTSD, but no higher, have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 4.3, 4.7, 4.130; Diagnostic Code 9411.

2. The criteria for entitlement to a TDIU have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102, 3.340, 3.341, 4.16, 4.19.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

The Veteran served on active duty from July 1969 to July 1973.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2025 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).

In the August 2025 VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement), the Veteran elected the Hearing docket. A Board hearing was held on January 7, 2026.

Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the May 2025 agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) decision, as well as any evidence submitted by the Veteran or his 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 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. A 70 percent rating for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is granted

The Veteran's PTSD has been evaluated under 38 C.F.R. § 4.130, DC 9411, under the General Rating Formula for Mental Disorders. 38 C.F.R. § 4.130, DC 9411. He contends that a higher rating is warranted for his current disability

Under the General Rating Formula for Mental Disorders, a 50 percent evaluation is assigned when a veteran's mental disability causes 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; or difficulty in establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships. Id.

A 70 percent evaluation is assigned when a veteran's mental disability causes 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
(e.g., retention of only highly learned material, forgetting to complete tasks); impaired judgment; impaired abstract thinking; disturbances of motivation and mood; or difficulty in establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships. Id.

A 70 percent evaluation is assigned when a veteran's mental disability causes 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); or an inability to establish and maintain effective relationships. Id.

A 100 percent rating is assigned when a veteran's mental disability causes total occupational and social impairment, due to such symptoms as: gross impairment in thought processes or communication; persistent delusions or hallucinations; grossly inappropriate behavior; danger of hurting self or others; intermittent inability to perform activities of living (including maintenance of minimal hygiene); disorientation to time or place; or, memory loss for names of close relatives, occupation, or own name. Id.

When rating a mental disorder, VA must consider the frequency, severity, and duration of the Veteran's psychiatric symptoms, the length of remissions, and the Veteran's capacity for adjustment during periods of remission. The rating agency must assign a rating based on all the evidence of record that bears on occupational and social impairment, rather than solely on the examiner's assessment of the level of disability at the moment of the examination. When rating the level of disability from a mental disorder, the rating agency must consider the extent of social impairment, but cannot assign a rating solely on the basis of social impairment. 38 C.F.R. § 4.126.

Furthermore, the specified factors for each incremental rating are examples, rather than requirements, for a particular rating. The Board will not limit its analysis solely to whether the Veteran exhibited the symptoms listed in the rating criteria. Mauerhan v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 436 (2002). Indeed, the symptoms listed under § 4.130 are not intended to serve as an exhaustive list of the symptoms that VA may consider but as examples of the type of degree of symptoms, or the effects, that would warrant a particular rating. Mauerhan, 16 Vet. App. at 442 (2002). The Veteran's actual symptomatology, and resulting social and occupational impairment, will be the primary focus when assigning a disability rating for a mental disorder, and the Veteran may qualify for a particular rating by demonstrating the particular symptoms associated with that percentage, or other symptoms of similar severity, frequency, and duration. Vazquez-Claudio v. Shinseki, 713 F.3d 112, 116-17 (Fed. Cir. 2013).

Based on a review of the evidence, the Board finds that the evidence supports an award of 70 percent, but no higher, for the Veteran's PTSD.

The Veteran was afforded a VA examination in November 2024. The examiner found 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. He had symptoms of depressed mood, anxiety, suspiciousness, panic attacks that occur weekly or less often, chronic sleep impairment, disturbances of motivation and mood, difficulty in establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships, difficulty in adapting to stressful circumstances, including work or a work like setting.

The Veteran was afforded another VA examination in April 2025. The examiner found he had occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity. He was married to his wife of 53 years and had a close relationship with his children. He stated he settled in his new home and goes to the beach, amusement park, plays cards, and does puzzles. He has 6 or 7 couples that he spends time with in his campground. He does volunteer work at the campground, but mostly with adults as he cannot handle children screaming. He endorsed nightmares every night, intermittent anxiety and depression related to little things that can set it off. He stated he tends to worry about everything and has anxiety when driving, such that he lets his wife drive. He noted that he has had thoughts of "if it gets so bad, he would walk into the woods" and give up, but he could not see killing himself. Otherwise, he denied active suicidal ideation. He had symptoms of depressed mood, anxiety, suspiciousness, panic attacks more than once a week, chronic sleep impairment and disturbances of motivation and mood.

At
6 or 7 couples that he spends time with in his campground. He does volunteer work at the campground, but mostly with adults as he cannot handle children screaming. He endorsed nightmares every night, intermittent anxiety and depression related to little things that can set it off. He stated he tends to worry about everything and has anxiety when driving, such that he lets his wife drive. He noted that he has had thoughts of "if it gets so bad, he would walk into the woods" and give up, but he could not see killing himself. Otherwise, he denied active suicidal ideation. He had symptoms of depressed mood, anxiety, suspiciousness, panic attacks more than once a week, chronic sleep impairment and disturbances of motivation and mood.

At the January 2026 Board hearing, the Veteran testified that he has thoughts of hopelessness. He had thought about suicide during Covid and he continues to have thoughts about walking into the woods, but he is not sure of how he would kill himself. He stated he and his wife moved to an RV to live off the grid and have fewer confrontations with neighbors. He reported he works at the campsite in exchange for the rent. He stated he does not have much contact with his family because he cannot concentrate. He prefers to keep to himself but said he may join a game of cornhole. His wife has to drive him everywhere because it is too stressful. He also stated he only gets 2 or 3 hours of sleep a night because of his nightmares. He reported he has 7 to 9 panic attacks per week. He has feelings that he needs to get out of the situation, and sometimes he has flashbacks. His wife has to assist him in getting out of the panic attacks because it can take a while.

The Board finds the VA treatment records reflect the Veteran continued to struggle with symptoms of sleep disturbance, nightmares, avoidance, hypervigilance, and flashbacks. He reported getting only 3 to 4 hours of sleep at night but having vivid nightmares every night. He also stated that he avoids most activities due to flashbacks or hypervigilance, but his spouse forces him out of the house. He has mood swings and gets "snappy". In October 2024, the Veteran reported that over the past month, he wished he were dead or wished he could go to sleep and not wake up, but did not have actual thoughts of killing himself.

The Board finds that the evidence supports an award of a 70 percent rating for PTSD. The Board bases this finding on the Veteran's depression, anxiety, panic attacks occurring more than once a week, passive suicidal ideation, and difficulty adapting to stressful circumstances.

Further, the Board finds that the Veteran's PTSD symptoms did not approximate a level of severity contemplated by the next higher 100 percent rating criteria, as the Veteran is not shown to have total social and occupational impairment. Here, the Veteran has maintained his family connections and relationships. He also reported working at the campsite in exchange for waiving the rental fees. Moreover, the records reflects that he has been able maintain hobbies such as going to the beach, puzzles, and cards. The evidence does not reflect the presence of 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; or memory loss for names of close relatives, own occupation, or own name. Consequently, the Board concludes entitlement to a 70 percent rating, but no higher, for PTSD is warranted.

2. A TDIU due to service-connected disabilities is denied

A TDIU may be assigned, where the schedular rating is less than total, where a veteran is unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation as a result of service-connected disabilities. 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a). To qualify for schedular consideration of a TDIU, if there is only one such disability, this disability shall be ratable at 60 percent or more, and, 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. Id.

The Board finds that the Veteran as met the schedular rating thresholds for TDIU under 38 C.F.R. § 4.16 (a). in that he is in receipt of a 70 percent rating for PTSD as of this decision, a 20 percent rating diabetes, 10 percent ratings for his bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy, a 10 percent for tinnitus and additional noncompensable ratings, for a combined 80 percent rating.

Entitlement to a total rating must be based solely on the impact of service-connected disabilities on the
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. Id.

Entitlement to a total rating must be based solely on the impact of service-connected disabilities on the ability to keep and maintain substantially gainful employment. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.340, 3.341, 4.16. 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).

For VA purposes, the term unemployability is synonymous with inability to secure and follow a substantially gainful occupation. VAOPGPREC 75-91, 57 Fed. Reg. 2,317 (Jan. 21, 1992). Consideration may be given to the veteran's education, special training, and previous work experience, but not to his or her age or to the impairment caused by nonservice-connected disabilities. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.341, 4.16, 4.19; Van Hoose v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 361 (1993). A high rating is recognition that the impairment makes it difficult to obtain or keep employment, but the ultimate question is whether the Veteran is capable of performing the physical and mental acts required by employment, not whether he can find employment. Van Hoose, 4 Vet. App. at 363.

In Ray v. Wilkie, 31 Vet. App. 58, 73 (2019), the Court interpreted the phrase "unable to secure and follow a substantially gainful occupation" to have two components: one economic and one noneconomic. The economic component means an occupation earning more than marginal income (outside of a protected environment) as determined by the U.S. Department of Commerce as the poverty threshold for one person, and the noneconomic component requires more than determining the presence or absence of employment producing income exceeding any particular threshold. The ultimate inquiry on the Veteran's ability to secure or follow that type of employment.

Here, the remaining question is whether the Veteran's service-connected disabilities, either alone or in the aggregate, prevented him from securing or following a substantially gainful occupation.

Turning to the evidence of record, the Veteran stated in his January 2025 VA Form 21-8940, Application for Increased Compensation Based on Unemployability, that he was an inventory control supervisor from 2000 to 2015. He asserts he became too disabled to work in 2015 due to PTSD, although he also acknowledged that he retired because his wife had wanted to move to Florida. The highest level of education he completed was 12th grade in high school.

In a November 2024 VA PTSD examination, the examiner noted that the Veteran would have difficulty in adapting to stressful circumstances, including work or a work like setting.

However, the examiner at an April 2025 VA PTSD examination, found no job related difficulties secondary to his service-connected mental health issues.

At the January 2026 Board hearing, the Veteran reported that his service-connected conditions prevent him from working. He reported that although he has done a few things throughout the years for the campground, he would not be able to lead people. He reported that he worked on state inspection machines, but it was too much, and he was then offered a job in a warehouse where he ended up staying. He stated that he was by himself in the warehouse. He previously drove a forklift but stated that he could no longer drive a forklift because of the same reason he does not drive, i.e. he cannot handle a crisis, or annoyance, or is unsure when he needs to take an exit. He stated he would be startled if something were to come around the corner, so due to the unpredictability, he would not be able to drive a forklift. He stated his neuropathy has also become worse, and it would affect sitting at a desk job due to pain, however, he noted that he was not sitting very long when at the warehouse.

The Veteran also testified that he retired in 2015 mostly because his wife wanted him to move to Florida, but there were other things that his workplace wanted him to do that were too demanding due to his mental health.
because of the same reason he does not drive, i.e. he cannot handle a crisis, or annoyance, or is unsure when he needs to take an exit. He stated he would be startled if something were to come around the corner, so due to the unpredictability, he would not be able to drive a forklift. He stated his neuropathy has also become worse, and it would affect sitting at a desk job due to pain, however, he noted that he was not sitting very long when at the warehouse.

The Veteran denied that a doctor has ever told him he is unable to work due to his service-connected disabilities and he did not ever receive Social Security Disability benefits due to a disability

Based on the foregoing, the Board finds that, although the Veteran's service-connected disabilities may have negatively impacted his functioning during the appeal period and, in fact, he has a combined 80 percent rating, which is recognition that the related impairment makes it difficult to obtain or keep employment, they do not render him unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation consistent with his education and work history.

As an initial matter, the Veteran contends that only his PTSD symptoms prevent him from working. He has psychiatric symptoms of depressed mood, anxiety, suspiciousness, panic attacks, chronic sleep impairment, and difficulty in adapting to stressful circumstances, including work, which result in occupational and social impairment with deficiencies in most areas, such as work, school, family relations, judgment, thinking, and/or mood, the Board finds that such symptoms do not render him mentally unable to perform the type of activities required by an occupation that is consistent with his education and work history.

Specifically, as noted previously, the Veteran completed high school, and his work history includes labor positions working in a warehouse and supervisory positions. In this regard, while he reported that he can no longer drive a forklift, he also indicated that he worked by himself, which would reduce his interpersonal interactions. Additionally, while he reported difficulty with neuropathy, he reported that he did not sit very long on a forklift. Furthermore, despite such reported symptomatology and the reported interference in his ability to work, the Board notes that the Veteran has nonetheless volunteers at his campsite, which requires the mental acuity to show up for such activities on time and perform his assigned duties. While such volunteer work is not equivalent to a substantially gainful occupation, the Board the finds the fact that the Veteran is able to successfully engage in such activities demonstrates his ability to perform the necessary physical and mental acts that would allow him to secure and follow a substantially gainful occupation consistent with his education and work history.

Thus, based on the foregoing, the Board finds that the Veteran's service-connected disabilities do not render him unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation consistent with his education and work history. In reaching such decision, the Board has considered the applicability of the benefit of the doubt doctrine. However, as the weight of the probative evidence is against the Veteran's claim, that doctrine is not applicable in the instant appeal and his claim for a TDIU must be denied. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102.

MATTHEW W. BLACKWELDER

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board Jaigirdar, B.

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