BVA Case 19-5119: PTSD
BVAReal Board of Veterans' Appeals decision · · REYNA
Conditions Claimed
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
PTSDPsychiatricBackAnkleEye
Why It Was Decided This Way
Silva had failed to present new and material evidence in support of the claim.
Silva had presented with his July 19, 2010 request to reopen his PTSD claim did not quality as new and material evidence because it failed to address the question of whether his diagnosis of PTSD was the result of an in-service stressor.
156(b) provides as fol- lows: New and material evidence received prior to the ex- piration of the appeal period, or prior to the appel- late decision if a timely appeal has been filed (including evidence received prior to an appellate decision and referred to the agency of original ju- risdiction by the Board of Veterans Appeals with- out consideration in that decision in accordance with the provisions of § 20.
And, he elaborated that he was submitting “new and material evidence pertinent to the ad- judication of his still pending claim raised with the August 15, 2012, Substantive Appeal for service connection for [his PTSD] disability.
Like the RO, the Board found that the December 6, 2012 decision reopening Mr.
The Board determined that in its December 6, 2012 decision the RO had correctly relied on Clemons v.
Silva contends that, under § 7104(a), the VA was required to act through the Board rather than the RO, in response to the new and material evidence represented by the October 15, 2012 examination.
Silva had presented with his July 19, 2010 request to reopen his 2005 PTSD claim did not qualify as new and material evidence because it failed to address the question of whether the diagnoses of PTSD that he presented was the result of an in-service stressor.
Authorities Cited
Regulations Cited (38 CFR / 38 USC)
Denial Type
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 →