181204-1217

CourtBoard of Veterans' Appeals
DecidedNovember 29, 2019
Docket181204-1217
StatusUnpublished

This text of 181204-1217 (181204-1217) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Board of Veterans' Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
181204-1217, (bva 2019).

Opinion

Citation Nr: AXXXXXXXX Decision Date: 11/29/19 Archive Date: 11/29/19

DOCKET NO. 181204-1217 DATE: November 29, 2019

ORDER

From August 16, 2011, entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities (TDIU) is granted.

Prior to July 12, 2013, entitlement to special monthly compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1114(s) is denied.

From August 16, 2011, basic eligibility to Chapter 35 Dependents’ Educational Assistance is granted.

REMANDED

Service connection for erectile dysfunction is remanded.

Entitlement to an effective date prior to August 16, 2011 for the award of a TDIU is remanded.

Entitlement to an effective date prior to August 16, 2011 for basic eligibility to Chapter 35 Dependents’ Educational Assistance is remanded.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. The Veteran raised a claim for a TDIU during March 18, 2011 hearing testimony.

2. Prior to August 16, 2011, the Veteran did not meet the percentage requirements for a TDIU under 38 C.F.R. § 4.16 (a).

3. From August 16, 2011, the Veteran met the percentage requirements for a TDIU under 38 C.F.R. § 4.16 (a) and has been unable to secure or follow gainful or more than marginal employment due to service-connected disabilities.

4. Prior to July 12, 2013, the Veteran did not have a 100 percent rating plus an additional service-connected disability independently ratable at 60 percent or more.

5. From August 16, 2011, the Veteran is in receipt of a total rating based on service-connected disabilities which were permanent in nature.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. From August 16, 2011, the criteria entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5103, 5103A, 5107 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.321, 3.340, 3.341, 4.16 (2018).

2. Prior to July 12, 2013, the criteria for entitlement to special monthly compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1114(s) have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1114 (s) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.350 (i) (2018).

3. From August 16, 2011, the criteria for basic eligibility to Chapter 35 Dependents’ Educational Assistance have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 3501 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.340 (2018).

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

1. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability from August 16, 2011

Except as otherwise provided, the effective date of an evaluation and award for pension, compensation, or dependency and indemnity compensation based on an original claim, a claim reopened after a final disallowance, or a claim for increase will be the date of receipt of the claim or the date entitlement arose, whichever is the later. 38 U.S.C. § 5110 (a) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400 (2018).

A TDIU was granted from July 12, 2013. The Veteran’s representative contends in a February 2017 statement that an effective date of March 18, 2011 is warranted for a TDIU. She contends that the Veteran raised a claim for a TDIU during March 18, 2011 hearing testimony and that service connection for a back disability was also granted from the March 18, 2011 date.

The record shows that the Veteran was afforded a Board hearing in conjunction with a prior claim for an increased rating for his left knee. He testified in March 18, 2011 that due to his left knee and back, he had lost 30 to 40 jobs since 2000, that he required frequent breaks due to the left knee, and he testified that he could not hold a job and could not sit for long periods of time due to his knee. Resolving reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Board finds that the Veteran reasonably raised a claim for a TDIU during March 18, 2011 Board hearing testimony.

TDIU ratings may be assigned where the schedular rating is less than total, when it is found that the disabled person is unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation as a result of a single service-connected disability ratable at 60 percent or more, or as a result of two or more disabilities, provided at least one disability is ratable at 40 percent or more and there is sufficient additional service-connected disability to bring the combined rating to 70 percent or more. 38 C.F.R. § § 3.340, 3.341, 4.16(a). For the purpose of one 60 percent or one 40 percent disability in combination, disabilities resulting from a common etiology or a single accident will be considered as one disability. 38 C.F.R. § 4.16 (a). Even when the percentage requirements are not met, entitlement to a total rating, on an extraschedular basis, may nonetheless be granted, in exceptional cases, when the veteran is unable to secure and follow a substantially gainful occupation by reason of service-connected disabilities. 38 C.F.R. § § 3.321 (b), 4.16(b).

Substantially gainful employment is defined as work which is more than marginal and which permits the individual to earn a living wage. Moore v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 356 (1991). In evaluating a veteran’s employability, consideration may be given to his or her level of education, special training, and previous work experience in arriving at a conclusion, but not to age or impairment caused by nonservice-connected disabilities. 38 C.F.R. § § 3.341, 4.16, 4.19. The sole fact that a claimant is unemployed or has difficulty obtaining employment is not enough. A high rating in itself is recognition that the impairment makes it difficult to obtain and keep employment. The question is whether the veteran is capable of performing the physical and mental acts required by employment, not whether the veteran can find employment. 38 C.F.R. § 4.16 (a).

The Veteran had a combined 50 percent disability rating from March 18, 2011. From March 18, 2011 to August 16, 2011, the Veteran did not meet the percentage requirements for a TDIU under 38 C.F.R. § 4.16 (a).

For the appeal period from August 16, 2011 to July 11, 2013, the Veteran was in receipt of a combined 60 percent disability rating. He was in receipt of a 20 percent rating for a left knee anterior cruciate ligament injury, a separate 10 percent rating for left knee osteoarthritis, and more recently, he was awarded service connection for lumbosacral strain from March 18, 2011, rated at 20 percent with left and right lower extremity sciatica, each rated at 10 percent.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Moore v. Derwinski
1 Vet. App. 356 (Veterans Claims, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
181204-1217, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/181204-1217-bva-2019.