BVA Case 12-2616: Ptsd

Osowiecki and, on remand,the Board determined the RO decision to be void ab initio,and the 10%was restored,effective April 1, 1969.

TDIU Prior to May 8, 2003 The appellant argues that the Board erred in assigning May 2003 as the effective date for the award of TDIU benefits based on his PTSD.

The Board's determination of the proper effective date for an award of VA benefits is a finding of fact that the Court reviews under the clearly erroneous standard of review set forth in 38 U.

A finding of material fact is clearly erroneous when the Court, after reviewing the entire evidence, is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.

With respect to any finding on an issue of material fact or law, the Board must provide an adequate statement of reasons or bases that enables a claimant to understand the precise basis for its decision and facilitates review in this Court.

The Court explained: In the context of TDIU,new evidence of unemployability related to the underlying condition submitted within one year of the assignment of an initial rating that is less than the maximum sought may constitute new and material evidence under 38 C.

80,84-85 (2008)(holding that,in certain circumstances,VA's duty to assist may include providing the veteran with a retrospective medical opinion and ordering the Board to consider whether such an opinion was necessary to evaluate the severity of Mr.

156(b)(2013) ( New and material evidence received prior to the expiration of the appeal period,or prior to the appellate decision if a timely appeal has been filed .