BVA9506349 DOCKET NO. 91-40 594 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St. Louis, Missouri THE ISSUES 1. Entitlement to service connection for loss of feeling in both feet secondary to chronic lumbosacral strain. 2. Entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). 3. Entitlement to a total disability rating for compensation purposes based on individual unemployability. 4. Entitlement to an effective date prior to October 3, 1990, for a 60 percent evaluation for chronic lumbosacral strain. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD L. Jennifer Lane, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran had active service from December 1942 to October 1945. The appeal arises from rating decisions dated in February 1990, March 1991 and December 1992 in which the Regional Office (RO) denied a total disability rating for compensation purposes based on individual unemployability, service connection for loss of feeling in both feet secondary to chronic lumbosacral strain, status post laminectomy and fusion, service connection for post- traumatic stress disorder, and assigned an effective date of October 3, 1990 for a 60 percent evaluation for chronic lumbosacral strain, status post laminectomy and fusion. The veteran subsequently appealed the RO's denial of the first three claims and disagreed with the effective date assigned for the 60 percent disability evaluation. The Board issued remands in April 1992 and October 1993. The case is now ready for appellate review. CONTENTIONS OF APPELLANT ON APPEAL The veteran contends that his service-connected back disability causes him to experience loss of feeling in both feet. He also maintains that he is unemployable as a result of his service- connected back disability. Additionally, the veteran asserts that the effective date for the award of a 60 percent evaluation for the back disability should be the date he was separated from service. It is also contended that service connection is warranted for post-traumatic stress disorder. Finally, the veteran's representative asserts that the veteran should be afforded additional examinations as previous examinations were not adequate. DECISION OF THE BOARD The Board, in accordance with the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 7104 (West 1991), has reviewed and considered all of the evidence and material of record in the veteran's claims file. Based on its review of the relevant evidence in this matter, and for the following reasons and bases, it is the decision of the Board that the veteran has not met the initial burden of submitting evidence sufficient to justify a belief by a fair and impartial individual that the claim for entitlement to service connection for loss of feeling in both feet secondary to a service-connected disability is well-grounded. It is also the decision of the Board that the preponderance of the evidence is against the claims for entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder, a total disability rating for compensation purposes based on individual unemployability, and an effective date prior to October 3, 1990, for a 60 percent evaluation for chronic lumbosacral strain, status post laminectomy and fusion. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Evidence tending to establish that loss of feeling in both feet was manifest during service or that such disorder is attributable to service has not been submitted. 2. Evidence tending to establish that any loss of feeling in both feet is proximately due to or the result of a service- connected disability has not been received. 3. All relevant information necessary for an equitable disposition of the claims for entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder, a total disability rating for compensation purposes based on individual unemployability and an earlier effective date for a 60 percent evaluation for the service-connected back disability has been developed. 4. The veteran does not have post-traumatic stress disorder as the result of an inservice stressor. 5. The veteran's service-connected disabilities are chronic lumbosacral strain, status post laminectomy and fusion, evaluated as 60 percent disabling, tinnitus, evaluated as 10 percent disabling; and hearing loss of the left ear and burn scar on the left hand, evaluated as noncompensably disabling. 5. The combined rating for the veteran's service-connected disabilities is 60 percent. 6. The evidence fails to demonstrate that the veteran is unable to follow a substantially gainful occupation by reason of his service-connected disabilities. 7. The veteran filed a claim for an increased evaluation for chronic lumbosacral strain, status post laminectomy and fusion on October 3, 1990. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The veteran has not presented a well-grounded claim for entitlement to service connection for loss of feeling in both feet secondary to a service-connected disability. 38 U.S.C.A. §5107 (West 1991). 2. Post-traumatic stress disorder was not incurred in or aggravated by service. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1110, 5107 (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304(f) (1993). 3. The criteria for a total disability rating for compensation purposes based on individual unemployability are not met. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1155, 5107 (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.201, 3.321, 3.340, 3.341, 4.7, 4.16, Part 4, Diagnostic Code 5293, 6100, 6260, 7801 (1993). 4. The criteria for an effective date prior to October 3, 1990, for a 60 percent evaluation for chronic lumbosacral strain are not met. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5110 (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400 (1993). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS I. Service Connection The initial burden is on the veteran to submit evidence to justify a belief by a fair and impartial individual that his claim for entitlement to service connection for loss of feeling in both feet secondary to his service-connected back disability is well-grounded. Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 49, 55 (1990); 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107. A well-grounded claim is a plausible claim which is meritorious on its own and capable of substantiation. Murphy v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 78, 81 (1990). Although it need not be conclusive, to be a well-grounded claim, the claim must be accompanied by evidence, and more than just an allegation is required. Tirpak v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 609, 611 (1992). It is contended that the veteran's Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) orthopedic and neurological examinations were inadequate because the examiners did not provide opinions as to the issue of secondary service connection for loss of feeling in both feet. For the reasons discussed below, the Board finds the veteran's claim for entitlement to service connection for loss of feeling in both feet, secondary to a nonservice-connected disability, not well-grounded. Therefore, the VA has no duty to assist in the development of the claim. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107. While the case was remanded before for development of the claim, the law with regard to what constitutes a well-grounded claim is continuing to develop. In light of more recent decisions by the Court of Veterans Appeals, the Board finds that dismissing the claim regarding loss of feeling in both feet is appropriate. Service connection may be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by service. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1110. Continuity of symptomatology is required to support the claim only where the condition noted during service is not, in fact, shown to be chronic, or where the diagnosis of chronicity may be legitimately questioned. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b). Service connection may also be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). The veteran contends that service connection is warranted for loss of feeling in both feet. The assessment at a VA examination in November 1992 was poor sensation and proprioception of both feet and the examiner noted that the clinical examination would suggest a peripheral neuropathy. The diagnoses at other VA examinations in November 1992 and December 1993 were peripheral neuropathy. However, the service medical records reveal no complaints, treatment or diagnoses regarding loss of feeling in both feet or peripheral neuropathy. In fact, examination of the feet in June 1945 was normal. Moreover, evidence tending to establish that loss of feeling in both feet was manifest in service has not been presented. The veteran himself does not contend that loss of feeling in both feet was manifested during service. Significantly, at a VA examination in December 1993, the veteran related that he has had complaints of numbness in the feet since the 1950's. Moreover, a physician has not attributed loss of feeling in both feet to service. As a layperson, the veteran, is not qualified to attribute any current disorder to service. Where the determinative issue involves a question of medical diagnosis or medical causation, competent medical evidence to the effect that the claim is plausible or possible is required to establish a well-grounded claim. Grottveit v. Brown, 5 Vet.App. 91, 93 (1993). The veteran essentially contends that his service-connected back disability, chronic lumbosacral strain, status post laminectomy and fusion, caused loss of feeling in both his feet. Secondary service connection for a disability is warranted when that disability is proximately due to or the result of a service- connected disease or injury. 38 C.F.R. § 3.310(a). However, a medical opinion that the veteran's loss of feeling in both feet is proximately due to or the result of a service-connected disability has not been received. The veteran's opinion that loss of feeling in both feet was caused by a service-connected disability is not sufficient to establish a plausible claim for service connection. Grottveit, 5 Vet.App. 91, 93. As the veteran has not met the initial burden of submitting evidence sufficient to justify a belief by a fair and impartial individual that the claim for entitlement to service connection for loss of feeling in both feet secondary to his service- connected back disability is well-grounded, the appeal of that claim is dismissed. The Board also points out that by dismissing the claim in question the veteran is not burdened with a prior final adjudication on the merits. Thus, he may submit a well- grounded claim for entitlement to service connection for loss of feeling in both feet secondary to his service-connected back disability in the future and will not be faced with a higher hurdle of providing new and material evidence to reopen that claim after a prior final adjudication. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5108, 7104, 7105 (West 1991). With regard to the claim for entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder, the Board finds that that claim is "well-grounded" within the meaning of 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107, that is, the claim is plausible, meritorious on its own or capable of substantiation. Murphy, 1 Vet.App. 78. The Board further finds that the VA has met its duty to assist in developing the facts pertinent to that claim. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107. The Board also notes that the rating decision dated in February 1990 denied service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder and that said decision was not appealed. However, the RO, in the supplemental statement of the case which initially considered this issue, apparently reopened the claim. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5108, 7105. The Board also finds that because the veteran has presented evidence and argument supporting the merits of the claim for entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder and the RO and Board have considered that claim in light of all the evidence of record and addressed the merits of said claim, the veteran is not prejudiced by the Board's not addressing the finality of the February 1990 rating decision denying service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder. Bernard v. Brown, 4 Vet.App. 384 (1993). Additionally, it is contended that the VA psychiatric examination performed in November 1992 was not adequate. The veteran's representative points out that the examiner did not refer to certain evidence in the examination report. Because the examiner failed to discuss certain specific items of evidence does not mean that the examination was inadequate. The examination report indicates that the examiner did review the veteran's psychiatric history as he refers to historical evidence of previous symptoms when discussing the current diagnosis. Examination also included an objective evaluation. Therefore, the Board finds that the examination was adequate and that another psychiatric examination, especially in light of the diagnosis and the lack of psychiatric complaints reported by the veteran, is not warranted. 38 C.F.R. § 3.326. Except for one reference in February 1945, the service medical records include no evidence of treatment for a psychiatric disorder. A medical record dated in February 1945 shows that the veteran was unrelieved by two months of hospitalization for back complaints and that an examiner suggested that the problem might have been neuropsychiatric in part. However, there is no further mention of a psychiatric disorder and no specific psychiatric complaints or diagnosis was noted. Thus, based on the objective evidence contemporaneous with service, the Board finds that a psychiatric disorder was not manifest during service. It is also significant that a VA examination performed in March 1946, only months after the veteran's separation from service, included a normal evaluation of the nervous system. There is evidence of psychiatric complaints years after service. The veteran was diagnosed with conversion reaction while being treated for physical complaints at a VA medical facility on two occasions from August to September and from November to December 1959, over a decade after his separation from service. Also, according to the report of the latter hospital admission, it was the impression of a psychologist that the veteran had a passive- aggressive personality with hysterical features. With regard to whether the veteran currently has a psychiatric disorder, the examiner who evaluated the veteran in November 1992 determined that "there [was] not sufficient psychiatric symptoms and/or signs that warrant[ed] any psychiatric diagnosis [at that time]. The Board notes that in order for service connection to be warranted, there must be evidence of a present disability attributable to service. Rabideau v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 141, 143 (1992). Service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder requires medical evidence establishing a clear diagnosis of the condition, credible supporting evidence that the claimed inservice stressor actually occurred, and a link, established by medical evidence, between current symptomatology and the claimed inservice stressor. 38 C.F.R. § 3.304(f). The U.S. Army and Joint Services Environmental Support Group has provided information showing that the unit to which the veteran was assigned when he was separated from service, the 121st Engineer Battalion, was engaged in battles with the enemy in July 1944 and from August to September 1944. However, regardless of whether the veteran experienced an inservice stressor, which has not been verified, medical evidence establishing a clear diagnosis of that condition has not been presented. While a social worker who conducted a social and industrial survey in November 1992 related that the veteran had several post-traumatic stress disorder like symptoms, psychiatric examination of the veteran failed to reveal the presence of post- traumatic stress disorder. A VA psychiatrist who examined the veteran in November 1992 diagnosed no psychiatric diagnosis According to that examiner, "there [was] certainly no current evidence of any significant post-traumatic stress symptoms." The Board finds the opinion of a qualified physician more probative than the veteran's contentions. Furthermore, the veteran as a layperson is not qualified to make a medical diagnosis. Espiritu v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.App. 492 (1992); Moray v. Brown, 5 Vet.App. 211, 214 (1993). Finally, when after consideration of all evidence and material of record, there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding the merits of an issue material to the determination of the matter, the benefit of the doubt in resolving such matter shall be given to the claimant. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(b). However, the preponderance of the evidence is against the veteran's claim for entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder. Therefore, the resolution of doubt is not necessary, and that claim is denied. II. Total Disability Rating The Board notes that the veteran's claim for entitlement to a total disability rating for compensation purposes based on individual unemployability is also well-grounded. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107. It is contended that the veteran's VA examinations were inadequate because the examiners did not provide opinions as to the effect of the veteran's service-connected disability on employment. However, the Board finds that the evidence of record, which includes a recent social and industrial survey, is adequate for determining whether the veteran's service-connected disabilities preclude him from engaging in substantially gainful employment. The veteran seeks a total rating based on individual unemployability due to his service-connected disabilities. Total disability will be considered to exist when there is present any impairment of mind or body which is sufficient to render it impossible for the average person to follow a substantially gainful occupation. 38 C.F.R. § 3.340. Total disability ratings for compensation may be assigned where the schedular rating is less than total, when the disabled person is, in the judgment of the rating agency, unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation as a result of service-connected disabilities. 38 C.F.R. § 4.16. The service-connected disabilities must be sufficient to produce umemployability without regard to advancing age. 38 C.F.R. § 3.341. Also, if there is only one service- connected disability, that disability shall be ratable at 60 percent or more, and if there are two or more disabilities, there shall be at least one disability ratable at 40 percent or more, and sufficient additional disability to bring the combined rating to 70 percent or more. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.340, 4.16. The veteran's service-connected disabilities are chronic lumbosacral strain, status post laminectomy and fusion, evaluated as 60 percent disabling; tinnitus, evaluated as 10 percent disabling; and hearing loss of the left ear and burn scar on the left hand, evaluated as noncompensably disabling. The combined rating for the veteran's service-connected disabilities is 60 percent. 38 C.F.R. § 4.25. Thus, the requirements of 38 C.F.R. § 4.16 are unfortunately not met in this case. The Board notes its finding that the evaluations assigned for the veteran's service-connected disabilities are consistent with the evidence of record. Also, the most probative evidence in determining the current severity of the veteran's service- connected disabilities is the most recent medical evidence. The 60 percent evaluation assigned for chronic lumbosacral strain, status post laminectomy and fusion, is the maximum schedular evaluation available for that disability. 38 C.F.R. Part 4, Diagnostic Code 5293. That evaluation contemplates pronounced disability with persistent symptoms compatible with sciatic neuropathy with characteristic pain and demonstrable muscle spasm, absent ankle jerk, or other neurological findings appropriate to site of diseased disc, and little intermittent relief. 38 C.F.R. Part 4, Diagnostic Code 5293. A VA examination in November 1993 revealed that the lumbosacral spine was essentially fixed and that hyperextension was markedly limited with maybe 10 degrees of lateral bending in both directions and no rotation possible either way. Significantly, while the veteran complained of a lot of muscle cramps and low back pain at a November 1992 VA examination, there was no complaint of pain during range of motion studies or during the November 1993 testing. Also, the veteran reported at the November 1992 that he was taking no pain medication other than one aspirin a day. Moreover, the veteran could not toe and heel walk but ambulated well in November 1992, and the examiner in November 1993 related that the veteran's walking endurance was limited to one half block because of cardiac pain and the need for nitroglycerin. Also, according to a VA outpatient treatment record dated in January 1991, the veteran did not wear any back brace or support. Additionally, the 10 percent schedular evaluation assigned for tinnitus contemplates persistent disability as a symptom of head injury, concussion or acoustic trauma. 38 C.F.R. Part 4, Diagnostic Code 6260. At an April 1993 VA examination, the veteran complained of constant bilateral tinnitus which was bothersome and interfered with communication. With regard to service-connected hearing loss, in situations where service connection has been established for defective hearing involving only one ear, and the veteran does not have total deafness in both ears, the hearing acuity of the non service-connected ear is considered to be normal. In such situations, a maximum 10 percent evaluation is assignable where hearing in the service-connected ear is at level X or XXI. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1160(a) (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. § 4.85 and Part 4, Diagnostic Code 6100 -6101 (1993). The most recent VA audiology examination was performed in April 1993. At that VA examination, the veteran's speech recognition ability was 62 percent and the average pure tone threshold at 1,000, 2,000, 3,000 and 4,000 hertz was 56.3 decibels in the left ear. Where the pure tone threshold average in the service-connected ear is 56 decibels with speech recognition ability of 62 percent (level VI), a noncompensable evaluation is assigned for the veteran's unilateral defective hearing. 38 C.F.R. § 4.85 and Part 4, Diagnostic Code 6100. The Board also finds that the noncompensable evaluation assigned for the burn scar on the left hand is the most appropriate evaluation for that disability. Under Diagnostic Code 7801, a 10 percent evaluation is warranted for a third degree burn scar with an area exceeding 6 square inches (38.7 cm.2). 38 C.F.R. Part 4. An April 1993 VA examination of the scar revealed a barely perceivable scar measuring 3 x 1 cm, and the examiner considered the extent of the scar minor. While the veteran complained of discomfort in the left hand in cold weather and decreased grip strength, objective examination revealed that the area was nontender to palpation and that there was good range of motion and strength. Therefore, a compensable evaluation is not warranted for that disability. 38 C.F.R. § 4.7, Part 4, Diagnostic Code 7801. Even though the percentage standards of 38 C.F.R. § 4.16 are not met, if the veteran is unemployable by reason of his service- connected disabilities, an extra-schedular evaluation may be granted. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.321, 4.16(b). However, the Board finds that the veteran is not unable to follow a substantially gainful occupation by reason of his service-connected disabilities. The Board also finds the objective evidence more persuasive than the veteran's assertions in evaluating whether he is prevented from engaging in such employment because of his service-connected disabilities. In a VA Form 21-8940 (Veteran's Application for Increased Compensation Based on Unemployability) received in September 1989, the veteran reported that he last worked full-time in 1963 and that he became too disabled to work in 1981. The evidence contemporaneous with the time at which the veteran stopped working full-time indicates that the primary reason for his not working was a nonservice-connected disorder. A report of a VA orthopedic examination in September 1964 shows that prior to suffering a myocardial infarction in 1963 the veteran was able to work part-time as a meat cutter although he had rather persistent disability at that time. Also, in a VA Form 21-4138 (Statement In Support Of Claim) received in December 1964, the veteran initially reported that he was unable to be employed because of his nonservice-connected heart condition and that he was limited to no strenuous exercise and no work. Later, he related that he was unemployable due to the heart condition and his service-connected back disability. Furthermore, it appears that the Social Security Administration (SSA) awarded the veteran disability benefits based on the nonservice-connected heart disorder. Records from SSA dated in June 1964 show that the veteran had chest pain, shortness of breath, and back problems which were apparently helped by treatment and surgery. According to the report, "[a]s a farmer and butcher ... with his heart disease [the veteran was] not able to return to that type of employment and [would] be precluded for an indefinite period of time." In addition to experience as a farmer and butcher, a report of a VA examination in August 1950 shows that the veteran worked as an appliance repairman. Also, in the September 1989 VA Form 21- 8940, the veteran related that he had completed high school and had experience as a store manager and had had training in radio and appliance repair. The Board notes that store management does not require manual labor and the repair of radios and other small appliances does not require a great deal of back motion. As the medical evidence discussed above shows, the veteran's other service-connected disabilities do not produce significant restrictions on employment. Also, while recent examination of the back revealed that the lumbosacral spine was essentially fixed with significant limitation of motion, testing did not elicit any complaints of pain. Moreover, the veteran's inability to walk more than one half block was attributed to his nonservice-connected heart disorder by a physician. Furthermore, recent objective evidence indicates that other nonservice-connected disorders also contribute to the veteran's difficulty with employment. According to the social worker who conducted the November 1992 social and industrial survey, "[the] veteran ha[s] been disabled since 1963 and ... a considerable percentage of [his] disability has been due to psychological problems, including PTSD-like symptoms." Moreover, according to a VA outpatient treatment record dated in February 1990, the veteran's central nervous system symptoms seemed to be more significant than his chronic low back disability. For the reasons discussed above, the Board finds that the veteran's service-connected disabilities do not preclude him from engaging in substantially gainful employment. Therefore, a a total disability rating for compensation purposes based on individual unemployability on an extra-schedular basis is not warranted. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.321, 4.16. The Board also finds that failure of the RO to consider or to document its consideration of 38 C.F.R. § 3.321(b)(1), and failure to refer the case to the Director of Compensation and Pension Service is no more than harmless error as the merits of the issue and the veteran's substantive rights were not affected. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.321(b)(1), 20.1102 (1993). Finally, as the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim for entitlement to a total disability rating for compensation purposes based on individual unemployability, resolution of reasonable doubt is not warranted. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(b). III. Earlier Effective Date The claim for entitlement to an effective date prior to October 3, 1990, for a 60 percent evaluation for chronic lumbosacral strain is also plausible or well-grounded. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107. Under applicable criteria, the effective date of an increased disability evaluation will be the date of receipt of claim or the date entitlement to arose, whichever is later. 38 C.F.R. § 3.400. However, disability compensation may be awarded the earliest date it is factually ascertainable that an increase in disability had occurred if the claim is received within one year from such date. 38 C.F.R. § 3.400(o)(2). The veteran filed a claim for a evaluation in excess of 40 percent for his service-connected back disability in a VA Form 21-4138 (Statement In Support Of Claim) on October 3, 1990. The evidence dated one year before the receipt of claim includes a report of a VA examination in December 1989, which was considered by the RO in its February 1990 rating decision which granted a 40 percent evaluation. The November 1989 examiner described the loss of spinal mobility as marked, and there were no muscle spasms palpable. Also, the examination report did not include findings consistent with pronounced neurological findings. 38 C.F.R. Part 4, Diagnostic Code 5293. He did have some neurological findings but they were not characterized as pronounced. Thus, a increase meeting the criteria contemplated for a 60 percent evaluation was not ascertainable within one year of the veteran's filing a claim for an increased evaluation, and the criteria contemplated for a 40 percent evaluation most closely reflected the disability picture presented at the December 1989 examination. 38 C.F.R. § 4.7, Part 4, Diagnostic Code 5293. The veteran essentially contends that the effective date for the award of a 60 percent evaluation for chronic lumbosacral strain, status post laminectomy and fusion, should be the date he was separated from service. However, the February 1990 rating decision and earlier rating decisions, which denied or granted evaluations less than 60 percent for the veteran's service- connected back disability, are final based upon the evidence then of record. 38 U.S.C.A. § 7105. Subsequent to those rating decisions, the veteran filed the claim for an increased evaluation October 3, 1990. The RO reviewed the evidence and initially denied an evaluation in excess of 40 percent. However, in a March 1991 rating decision, the RO granted a 60 percent evaluation for chronic lumbosacral strain, status post laminectomy and fusion, effective October 3, 1990, the date the claim for entitlement to an increased evaluation was filed. The determination of the regional office was consistent with the statute and regulations. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5110(b)(2) (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400(o) (1993); see Servillo v. Derwinski, 3 Vet.App. 196, 198 (1992); Padget v. Brown, 4 Vet.App 247 (1993). Based upon the law, regulations and decisions of the United States Court of Veterans Appeals, there is no doubt to be resolved. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(b). Accordingly, an earlier effective date for a 60 percent evaluation for chronic lumbosacral strain, status post laminectomy and fusion, is not warranted. ORDER The appeal of the claim for entitlement to service connection for loss of feeling in both feet secondary to his service-connected back disability is dismissed. Service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder is denied. A total disability rating for compensation purposes based on individual unemployability is denied. An effective date prior to October 3, 1990, for a 60 percent evaluation for chronic lumbosacral strain is denied. LAWRENCE M. SULLIVAN Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals The Board of Veterans' Appeals Administrative Procedures Improvement Act, Pub. L. No. 103-271, § 6, 108 Stat. 740, ___ (1994), permits a proceeding instituted before the Board to be assigned to an individual member of the Board for a determination. This proceeding has been assigned to an individual member of the Board. NOTICE OF APPELLATE RIGHTS: Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7266 (West 1991), a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals granting less than the complete benefit, or benefits, sought on appeal is appealable to the United States Court of Veterans Appeals within 120 days from the date of mailing of notice of the decision, provided that a Notice of Disagreement concerning an issue which was before the Board was filed with the agency of original jurisdiction on or after November 18, 1988. Veterans' Judicial Review Act, Pub. L. No. 100-687, § 402 (1988). The date which appears on the face of this decision constitutes the date of mailing and the copy of this decision which you have received is your notice of the action taken on your appeal by the Board of Veterans' Appeals.