## Facts

- A Marine Corps veteran sought service connection for a psychiatric condition later characterized as PTSD.
- In 1983, the VA denied the claim because the evidence did not establish a PTSD diagnosis.
- In 2006–2007, VA obtained additional official service department records regarding the veteran’s Vietnam combat experience, including an after-action report.
- VA granted service connection for PTSD effective June 5, 2006, tied to a later claim rather than the earlier claim.
- The Board of Veterans’ Appeals denied an earlier effective date, finding the newly obtained service records were not “relevant” under 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(c)(1) because they did not bear on the basis for the 1983 denial (lack of diagnosis).
- The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims affirmed.
- After the Supreme Court refined the framework for deference to an agency’s interpretation of its own regulation and remanded, the Federal Circuit reconsidered the meaning of “relevant” in § 3.156(c)(1).

## Issues

1. Whether, applying the post-remand framework for deference to an agency’s interpretation of its own regulation, “relevant” in 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(c)(1) includes later-obtained service department records that corroborate combat stressors but do not address the basis of a prior denial.
2. Whether § 3.156(c)(3) required an earlier effective date because the eventual PTSD award was “based all or in part” on the later-obtained service department records.

## Decision

- The Federal Circuit affirmed the Veterans Court’s judgment.
- The court held that “relevant” in § 3.156(c)(1) means records that speak to a matter in issue and bear on the basis for the prior denial.
- Because the 1983 denial rested on the absence of a PTSD diagnosis, and the new service records did not supply or affect that diagnosis, the records were not “relevant” within § 3.156(c)(1).
- As § 3.156(c)(1) was not satisfied, § 3.156(c)(3)’s earlier-effective-date provision was not triggered, and the June 5, 2006 effective date remained.
- A dissent would have read “relevant” more broadly and treated corroboration of combat stressors as sufficient to trigger reconsideration and an earlier effective date.

## Legal Principles

- Under 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(c)(1), reconsideration based on later-associated official service department records requires that the records be “relevant” to the earlier adjudication.
- In this context, “relevant” is limited to records that bear on the specific factual ground that was dispositive in the prior denial.
- Even after the refined deference framework for an agency’s interpretation of its own regulation, a court may accept the agency’s interpretation where, after applying traditional interpretive tools, the interpretation is reasonable and reflects an authoritative, considered agency view within its subject-matter domain.
- The earlier-effective-date rule in § 3.156(c)(3) applies only when an award follows from reconsideration triggered by “relevant” records under § 3.156(c)(1).

## Conclusion

The Federal Circuit held that later-obtained service department records corroborating combat events were not “relevant” under § 3.156(c)(1) where the earlier denial was based on lack of a PTSD diagnosis, so the veteran was not entitled to an effective date earlier than June 5, 2006.


Kisor v. McDonough, 995 F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2021)