BVA Case 23-4293: Ptsd

In April 2023,the appellant requested another 60-day extension of time,until July 4, 2023,to submit evidence and argument,but the Board denied the request later that month,finding that the appellant had not demonstrated good cause.

Parties'Arguments The appellant first contends that the Board erred in refusing to address the arguments he presented in May 2023,more than 2 weeks prior to the date of the decision on appeal.

Regarding the Board's denial of TDIU prior to February 24,2021,the appellant asserts that the Board failed to address his most severe psychiatric symptoms,including difficulties with concentration and memory,disturbances of motivation,difficulty adapting to workplace stress, panic attacks,and suicidal ideation,and the Board did not consider that his symptoms were more severe after he stopped working in 2013.

Additionally,the appellant alleges that the Board erred in stressing that he stopped working due to non-service-connected conditions rather than focusing on whether his service-connected conditions alone prevented gainful employment.

Of note,the Secretary argues that the Board considered the mental symptoms documented in the record,including [the appellant's]reported panic attacks,difficulty with concentration,and memory loss, but the Board concluded that those symptoms would not prevent him from securing and following substantially gainful employment.

Board Decision As an initial matter, the Board noted that this appeal stems from the March 2011 RO decision and that the matter had twice been appealed to the Court, resulting in JMRs.

Accordingly, the Board noted that,pursuant to 38 C.

Turning to the merits of the appellant's request for TDIU,the Board noted that the appellant was service connected for PTSD,sleep apnea,and hearing disabilities and that,because his request for TDIU was part and parcel of his PTSD increased rating claim,the period on appeal runs from September 2010 until February 2021,when the appellant was awarded TDIU.