Asthma decisions — 2015

The Veteran's asthma is being remanded for further examination and determination of its etiology, including whether it was aggravated by his military service.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for obstructive sleep apnea, asthma and COPD. The Board found that these conditions were not incurred or aggravated by service, including as secondary to service-connected PTSD or asbestos exposure.

The Veteran's bronchial asthma was rated at 100% effective May 1, 2011. Prior to that date, the disability was rated as 30%. The Board found that a higher rating was warranted beginning May 1, 2011.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for additional development, including verification of Vietnam service and obtaining relevant medical records. The Veteran's COPD and asthma are being considered in relation to exposure to water purification chemicals and herbicides, including Agent Orange.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to his failure to appear for a scheduled hearing. The case will be returned to the Board after scheduling him for an appropriate video conference hearing.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining private and VA treatment records, providing VCAA notice, and affording the Veteran a new VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of his asthma and service-connected sinusitis.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have PTSD related to service stressors, and his respiratory condition (asthma) existed prior to service. The appeal for service connection for hemorrhoids was withdrawn by the Veteran.

The Veteran's TDIU claim is remanded due to the need for additional medical examination and development of his service-connected bronchial asthma, as well as Social Security Administration disability benefits.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for additional medical opinions regarding his left knee disability and residuals of pneumonia.

The Veteran's death is not considered service-connected, and therefore the appellant does not meet the criteria for basic eligibility for VA home loan guaranty benefits.

The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss was not incurred or aggravated during service. The Board finds that the preexisting condition did not worsen as a result of noise exposure in service.

The claim for service connection for paranoid personality disorder has been reopened and granted.,The claim for PTSD due to military sexual assault has also been reopened and granted.

The Veteran's hypertension and heart disorder are not related to service, including in-service chemical exposure.,The Veteran's fibromyalgia is currently diagnosed but the relationship to service is unclear.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for a sleep disorder and asthma, finding that there was no evidence of a chronic disability or causation due to service.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's respiratory condition, including asthma and COPD, was not incurred during active military service or related to any incident of active military service. Therefore, service connection for this condition is denied.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and service connection were denied. The claim for bronchitis/asthma was reopened, but no new rating is granted as the current evaluation under Diagnostic Code 5280 (hallux valgus) is at its maximum.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining service treatment records and scheduling a respiratory examination to determine if her current respiratory disability is related to her service.

The Board has remanded the case due to the Veteran's request for a video conference hearing on all seven issues.

The Veteran's right knee degenerative joint disease was caused by his service-connected degenerative changes of the lumbosacral spine, and he is granted service connection for this condition.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the failure to appear for a scheduled VA examination and other procedural issues. The case will be returned to the Board after further development.