BVA Case 15-975: PTSD
BVAReal Board of Veterans' Appeals decision · · NEWMAN
Conditions Claimed
PTSDBackCervicalKneeHipHeadacheEye
Official 2026 VA monthly compensation, including the 2.8% COLA increase.
Dependent add-ons start at a 30% rating. Child-only and dependent-parent rates: see the full 2026 pay chart.
2026 base rates, all ratings (veteran alone)
| Rating | Monthly (2026, incl. 2.8% COLA) |
|---|---|
| 10% | $180.42 |
| 20% | $356.66 |
| 30% | $552.47 |
| 40% | $795.84 |
| 50% | $1,132.90 |
| 60% | $1,435.02 |
| 70% | $1,808.45 |
| 80% | $2,102.15 |
| 90% | $2,362.30 |
| 100% | $3,938.58 |
Referral disclosure: VetAid earns a referral fee if you become a paying REE Medical client through this link — it helps keep this site free. REE Medical provides paid medical evidence; it is not a law firm, VSO, or claims agent, and VetAid has not independently verified its services. VSOs and VA-accredited representatives will help you file your claim at no cost, and no one can guarantee a rating increase.
Issues on Appeal
PTSDBackCervicalKneeHipHeadacheEye
Why It Was Decided This Way
The Board reopened Saun- ders’s knee claim, concluding the additional evidence she offered was new and material, but denied her claim on the merits.
But the Board concluded that Saunders failed to show the existence of a present disability as is required for service connection.
Because the examiner did not provide a pathology to explain the pain Saunders reported, the Board denied Saunders service connection for her knee claim.
She argued there that the Board erred legally in its interpretation of what constitutes a “disability” under 38 U.
t could not review the Board’s factual determination that Sanchez-Benitez had failed to establish a nexus between his neck pain and his service.
In fact, if the Board had found that Saunders’s in- service diagnosis of PFPS was not a disease or injury, it would not have reopened her claim based on new and material evidence.
The panel instead concluded that the Board and Veterans Court found that the veteran had not met the nexus requirement as his current pain could not be attributed to the trauma he experienced while in service.
The Veterans Court’s interpretation of “disability” is also illogical in the broader context of the statute, given that the third requirement for service connection is estab- lishment of a nexus between the present disability and the disease or injury incurred during service.
Authorities Cited
Regulations Cited (38 CFR / 38 USC)
Denial Type
No Nexus|Not New Material
Find Similar Precedent for Your Claim
VetAid's analyzer maps your claim against thousands of real Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions like this one — surfacing the exact case law that supports your arguments.
Run my claim through VetAid →