BVA Case 20-5175: Ptsd

The Board found that the July 2018 and October 2018 private and VA examiners, respectively,found that Mr.

3 The Board found that the July 2018 private examiner noted the following symptoms: suspiciousness, problems going and staying asleep,and 'mind spins' (consistent with symptoms listed in the 30%criteria);and having 4 symptoms not listed with a specific disability rating: PTSD-related flashbacks, avoidance, feelings of detachment from others,irritable behavior and angry outbursts,hypervigilance, exaggerated startle response,and problems with concentration.

However,the Board determined that these symptoms warranted no more than a 50%rating for three reasons: (1)They more closely approximate the 50%rating criteria than the 70% rating criteria in terms of severity, frequency,and duration;(2)they are similar to the symptoms listed in the 50%rating criteria; 4 and (3)the October 2018 VA examiner considered these symptoms and opined that Mr.

However,the Board determined that this evidence did not warrant a disability rating higher than 50%for several reasons: [T]he examiner does not explain his rationale[]beyond indicating that [ Mr.

Based on the evidence, the Board denied a disability rating in higher than 50%for Mr.

Similarly,The Board found that the October 2018 VA examiner noted the following symptoms: anxiety, panic attacks that occur weekly or less often, and chronic sleep impairments (consistent with symptoms listed in the 30%criteria);and experiencing difficulty in establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships ;difficulty get[ting]close to people and trusting people;becoming frustrated easily during conversations and need[ing]to walk away at times ;and being written up a few times at work,but never fired (consistent with symptoms listed in the 50%criteria).

4 Specifically,the Board found that they were similar to impaired judgment, impaired abstract thinking, disturbances of motivation and mood, and difficulty in establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships.

Duffey argues that the Board erred and violated the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the U.