(a) General. Subject to the limitation in paragraph (b) of this section, total-disability compensation ratings may be assigned under the provisions of § 3.340. However, if the total rating is based on a disability or combination of disabilities for which the Schedule for Rating Disabilities provides an evaluation of less than 100 percent, it must be determined that the service-connected disabilities are sufficient to produce unemployability without regard to advancing age.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1155)
(b) Incarcerated veterans. A total rating for compensation purposes based on individual unemployability which would first become effective while a veteran is incarcerated in a Federal, State or local penal institution for conviction of a felony, shall not be assigned during such period of incarceration. However, where a rating for individual unemployability exists prior to incarceration for a felony and routine review is required, the case will be reconsidered to determine if continued eligibility for such rating exists.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 5313(c))
(c) Program for vocational rehabilitation. Each time a veteran is rated totally disabled on the basis of individual unemployability during the period beginning after January 31, 1985, the Veteran Readiness and Employment (VR&E) Service will be notified so that an evaluation may be offered to determine whether the achievement of a vocational goal by the veteran is reasonably feasible.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1163)
[46 FR 47541, Sept. 29, 1981, as amended at 50 FR 52774, Dec. 26, 1985; 55 FR 17271, Apr. 24, 1990l; 58 FR 32445, June 10, 1993; 68 FR 34542, June 10, 2003; 87 FR 8742, Feb. 16, 2022]
Notes of Decisions
Van Hoose v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 361 (Vet. App. 1993).
“See 38 C.F.R. § 3.341 (a) (1992); Hersey v. Derwinski, 2 Vet.”
Hersey v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 91 (Vet. App. 1992).
“” 38 C.F.R. § 3.341 (a) (1991). For entitlement to a total disability rating, either the veteran 1) must be rated as totally disabled (100%) under the Schedule for Rating Disabilities, or 2) must be rated at least 60 percent or more if there is only one disability which affects…”
Ferraro v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 326 (Vet. App. 1991).
“See 38 C.F.R. § 3.341 (a) (1990). However, the remaining factors mentioned in these opinions such as “employment history, educational and vocational attainment and all other factors having a bearing on the issue,” 38 C.”
Beaty v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 532 (Vet. App. 1994).
“” 38 C.F.R. § 3.341 (a) (1993); see also 38 U.”
Moyer v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 289 (Vet. App. 1992).
“” 38 C.F.R. § 3.341 (a) (1991). Moyer would be considered unemployable if employment were terminated because of his loss of use of his hand and arm, or where special consideration was given to him because of his disability, if he can satisfactorily show that he is unable to…”
Hodges v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 375 (Vet. App. 1993).
“38 C.F.R. § 3.341 (a) (1992); *379 Blackburn v.”
Blackburn v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 395 (Vet. App. 1993).
“See 38 C.F.R. § 3.341 (a) (1992). Under 38 C.”
Philbrook v. McDonough, 15 F.4th 1117 (Fed. Cir. 2021).
“§ 5313 (c) and the VA’s corresponding reg- ulation 38 C.F.R. § 3.341 (b). J.A. 67. Section 5313(c) pre- cludes the assignment of a TDIU rating for any period “during which the veteran is incarcerated in a Federal, State, local, or other penal institution or correctional facil-…”
Goodman v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 280 (Vet. App. 1991).
“See 38 C.F.R. § 3.341 (a) and § 4.19 (1990). The Secretary’s motion, however, overlooks appellant’s second argument which must be considered.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.