In cases involving aggravation by active service, the rating will reflect only the degree of disability over and above the degree existing at the time of entrance into the active service, whether the particular condition was noted at the time of entrance into the active service, or it is determined upon the evidence of record to have existed at that time. It is necessary therefore, in all cases of this character to deduct from the present degree of disability the degree, if ascertainable, of the disability existing at the time of entrance into active service, in terms of the rating schedule, except that if the disability is total (100 percent) no deduction will be made. The resulting difference will be recorded on the rating sheet. If the degree of disability at the time of entrance into the service is not ascertainable in terms of the schedule, no deduction will be made.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
8
cases, 1992–2020 · leading case:
Hensley v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 155 (Vet. App. 1993).
Hensley v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 155 (Vet. App. 1993).
“38 C.F.R. § 4.22 (1992). If the degree of disability at the time of entry is not ascertainable in terms of the schedule, “no deduction will be made.”
Verdon v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 529 (Vet. App. 1996).
· cites it 2× “155, 161 (1993) (citing 38 C.F.R. § 4.22 ). The Court made clear in Hensley that service connection for aggravation of a disability includes only the degree by which the disability increased in severity during service.”
Arnesen v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 432 (Vet. App. 1995).
“155, 161 (1993) (citing 38 C.F.R. § 4.22 ). The Board is required to provide a written statement of the reasons or bases for its findings and conclusions on all material issues of fact and law presented on the record; the statement must be adequate to enable an appellant to…”
08-25 230 (Board of Vet. App. 2016).
· cites it 3× “However, the RO found that because the right shoulder disability was 10 percent disabling prior to service, the rating must be reduced pursuant to the provisions of 38 C.F.R. 4.22. As an initial matter, the record shows uniformly that the Veteran entered an August 2004 period of…”
Aronson v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 580 (Vet. App. 1992).
“This deduction was made pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 4.22 (1991). The Secretary further states that petitioner will be receiving payment for retroactive benefits amounting to $33,994.”
190528-49749 (Board of Vet. App. 2020).
“38 C.F.R. § 4.22 . However, in this case, the Veteran’s bilateral pes planus was described as mild at his entrance into the relevant period of service in July 1997.”
Pylman v. West, 12 Vet. App. 114 (Vet. App. 1999).
“It appears to me to be a question of law whether under 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.22 , 4.83a, and 4.84a (1998) a deduction can be made for a preexisting vision defect if one eye was evaluated as 20/20 upon entry into service.”
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.