PSYCHIATRIC DISORDER

Summary

The Veteran, who served in the U.S. Navy from October 1962 to October 1964, appeals the denial of an increased rating for his psychiatric disability, currently rated at 30 percent. The Veteran sought an increased rating to the 50 percent level, which is assigned for occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity due to symptoms such as flattened affect, panic attacks more than once a week, difficulty understanding complex commands, impaired memory, impaired judgment, and difficulty establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships. The Board reviewed the Veteran's service treatment records, a July 2025 VA examination, and the Veteran's January 2026 testimony. The VA examiner opined that the Veteran's mental disorder symptoms caused occupational and social impairment due to mild or transient symptoms that decrease work efficiency only during periods of significant stress, or when symptoms are controlled by medication. The Veteran testified to increased nightmares, anxiety/panic attacks occurring about once a week, memory problems, and avoiding socialization due to hearing loss. However, the Board found that the Veteran's overall symptomatology and impairment most closely approximated the 30 percent rating criteria. While the Veteran reported intermittent symptoms, he continued to function well most of the time, working part-time restoring cars and exercising regularly. His reliability and productivity were not reduced more than occasionally, and his symptoms did not rise to the level required for a 50 percent rating. Therefore, the Board denied the increased rating.

Rationale

Veteran's symptoms did not meet criteria for 50% rating.; Reliability and productivity not reduced more than occasionally.; Continued overall productivity and social functioning.

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: A26040622
Decision Date: 04/30/26	Archive Date: 04/30/26

DOCKET NO. 250903-573921
DATE: April 30, 2026

ORDER

Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 30 percent for a psychiatric disability is denied.

FINDING OF FACT

The Veteran's psychiatric disability manifested by no worse than occupational and social impairment with occasional decrease in work efficiency and intermittent periods of inability to perform occupational tasks.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 30 percent for a psychiatric disability have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§3.321, 4.1, 4.3, 4.7, 4.10, 4.130, Diagnostic Code 9410.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

The Veteran had active duty service with the U.S. Navy with active duty service from October 1962 to October 1964. 

This case comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2025 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ). 

In September 2025, the Veteran filed a VA Form 10182 (notice of disagreement (NOD)) and selected the hearing docket. 38 C.F.R. § 20.202.  Under the hearing docket, the Board considers the evidence of record at the time of the decision on appeal, evidence submitted at a Board hearing, and evidence submitted by the Veteran in the 90-day period following the hearing. 38 C.F.R. § 20.302. In January 2026, the Veteran testified at a Board hearing before the undersigned, and a transcript of such is associated with the claims file. Evidence was not submitted during the 90-day period following the hearing to submit new evidence.

The Veteran has not alleged that this service-connected disability prevented him from obtaining or maintaining substantially gainful employment. The evidence of record demonstrates that the Veteran is retired and continues to work parttime restoring cars; he is not active in the competitive job market. A claim for total disability based on individual unemployability (TDIU) is not inferred as part of the claim for a compensable rating. Rice v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 447 (2009).

Disability evaluations are determined by the application of the Schedule for Rating Disabilities, which assigns ratings based on the average impairment of earning capacity resulting from a service-connected disability. 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. Part 4. Where there is a question as to which of two evaluations shall be applied, the higher evaluation will be assigned if the disability picture more nearly approximates the criteria required for that rating. Otherwise, the lower rating will be assigned. 38 C.F.R. § 4.7. After careful consideration of the evidence, any reasonable doubt remaining is resolved in favor of the Veteran. 38 C.F.R. § 4.3. Pertinent regulations do not require that all cases show all findings specified by the Rating Schedule, but that findings sufficiently characteristic to identify the disease and the resulting disability and, above all, coordination of rating with impairment of function will be expected in all cases. 38 C.F.R. § 4.21.

In order to evaluate the level of disability and any changes in condition, it is necessary to consider the complete medical history of the Veteran's condition. Schafrath v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 589, 594 (1991). Separate evaluations may be assigned for separate periods of time based on the facts found. In other words, the evaluations may be staged. Staged ratings are appropriate for any rating claim when the factual findings show distinct time periods during the appeal period where the service-connected disability exhibits symptoms that would warrant different ratings. Fenderson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 119 (1999); Hart v. Mansfield, 21 Vet. App. 505 (2007).

In rendering a decision on appeal, the Board must 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 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
119 (1999); Hart v. Mansfield, 21 Vet. App. 505 (2007).

In rendering a decision on appeal, the Board must 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 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).

The Veteran's psychiatric disability is currently rated 30 percent disabling under the general rating formula for mental disorders 38 C.F.R. § 4.130, Diagnostic Code 9410. 

A 30 percent rating is assigned for 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 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).

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; difficulty in establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships.

A 70 percent 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 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 worklike setting); inability to establish and maintain effective relationships.

A 100 percent rating is assigned for 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; memory loss for names of close relatives, own occupation, or own name.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has noted the "symptom-driven nature" of the General Rating Formula and that "a Veteran may only qualify for a given disability rating under § 4.130 by demonstrating the particular symptoms associated with that percentage, or others of similar severity, frequency, and duration." Vasquez-Claudio v. Shinseki, 713 F.3d 112, 116 (Fed. Cir. 2013). The Federal Circuit has explained that "symptomatology should be the fact-finder's primary focus when deciding entitlement to a given disability rating." Id. at 117. The psychiatric symptoms listed in the above rating criteria are not exclusive but are examples of typical symptoms for the listed percentage ratings. Mauerhan v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 436 (2002). However, if the evidence shows that a veteran has symptoms or effects that cause occupational or social impairment equivalent to what would be caused by the symptoms listed in the diagnostic code, the appropriate equivalent rating will be assigned. Id. at 443.

A June 2024 VA treatment note documented that the Veteran was married and lived with his wife. The Veteran was a retired auto mechanic. The Veteran worked part-time restoring automobiles. The Veteran exercised 3 days a week at the gym.

During the July 2025 VA examination, the Veteran reported that he was married and had two children. The Veteran "flails around" when he had nightmares and sometimes his wife had to wake him up. The Veteran indicated that he did not engage in any mental health treatment. Since the Veteran retired he "thinks about it more." The Veteran sometimes had nightmares when he saw an aircraft carrier. The Veteran was a car mechanic in 2000
 equivalent rating will be assigned. Id. at 443.

A June 2024 VA treatment note documented that the Veteran was married and lived with his wife. The Veteran was a retired auto mechanic. The Veteran worked part-time restoring automobiles. The Veteran exercised 3 days a week at the gym.

During the July 2025 VA examination, the Veteran reported that he was married and had two children. The Veteran "flails around" when he had nightmares and sometimes his wife had to wake him up. The Veteran indicated that he did not engage in any mental health treatment. Since the Veteran retired he "thinks about it more." The Veteran sometimes had nightmares when he saw an aircraft carrier. The Veteran was a car mechanic in 2000. He worked at the local YMCA for a few years helping drive children to the after-school program. The Veteran had a euthymic mood and a full range affect. The Veteran's speech was coherent, and his thought content was logical. The Veteran arrived on time for the examination. He was dressed appropriately and was able to observe social cues. The Veteran denied suicidal and homicidal ideation. The Veteran had chronic sleep impairment as a symptom of his disability. The examiner opined that the Veteran's mental disorder symptom caused an 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 medication. 

In January 2026, the Veteran testified that due to his hearing loss he would not socialize and avoided strangers. The Veteran was embarrassed to ask people to repeat themselves. He indicated that he would get frustrated because he could not hear and his anxiety increased because he could not hear "warnings" around him. The Veteran was now having increased episodes of nightmares. The Veteran had panic attacks/anxiety attacks once a week or so. He testified that his panic attacks lasted 15 to 20 minutes. The Veteran's symptoms were triggered by the news of different deployments and carriers at sea. He reported that he was now having problems with his short-term memory. The Veteran did not sleep very well and tossed and turned. He reported behaviors like making sure light switches were all in the same direction, or pushing chairs into the table. He did not, however, report that such interfered with his routine activities.

Based on the Veteran's overall symptomatology and the resulting impairment stemming therefrom, the Board finds that the disability picture presented most closely approximates the level of severity contemplated by the current 30 percent rating for his psychiatric disability.  While the Veteran reported that he did not socialize, stayed home, and avoided strangers due to his hearing loss. The Veteran was able to maintain relationships with some friends and family. The Veteran continued to workout 3 times a week and worked on restoring automobiles.  The Veteran had panic/anxiety attacks once a week or so. The Veteran indicated that his symptoms were triggered by the news of the different deployments and carriers at sea. He reported that he was now having problems with his short-term memory.  However, the Veteran was able to remember his name, wife's name, and past occupations. The Veteran denied active suicidal or homicidal ideation. The Veteran was consistently cooperative and communicative, with clear thought processes and no hallucinations or delusions. There was no evidence that the Veteran's speech or affect was not within normal limits, that he had trouble understanding, or had impaired judgment or thinking. There was no indication that the Veteran had difficulty in establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships. Since the Veteran's retirement he was able to work part-time restoring automobiles. 

It is clear the Veteran does have intermittent fluctuations of symptoms, with periods of increased nightmares, irritability, anxiety/panic attacks, and frustration. However, in his daily life he continues to function well most of the time. His reliability and productivity were not reduced more than occasionally due to his symptoms of chronic sleep impairment, panic/anxiety attacks, mild memory loss, and avoiding strangers due to his hearing impairment.  Thus, the reported symptoms of his psychiatric disability did not rise to the level of a 50 percent rating. His reliability and productivity were not reduced on a daily basis, as shown by his continued overall productivity and social functioning. 

 

WILLIAM H. DONNELLY

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Baxter, Sikenah

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.