Chronic bronchitis Board decisions

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for back disorder with pain, leg symptoms and sciatica, as well as COPD, asthma and bronchitis. The Board found that a chronic back disorder was not manifested during or within one year after service, nor is there competent evidence relating current back disorder to service. For COPD, asthma and bronchitis, the Board concluded that they were not incurred in or aggravated by active service.

The Board found that the veteran's current respiratory disorder is not related to his military service, including due to asbestos exposure. The preponderance of evidence does not support a finding that any current respiratory condition was incurred or aggravated by service.

The Board has determined that the veteran's diabetes mellitus is proximately due to his service-connected psoriasis and therefore grants service connection for this condition. The issue of whether bronchitis is secondary to service-connected psoriasis remains pending.

The veteran's daughter is not eligible for Survivors' and Dependents' Educational Assistance (DEA) benefits because her 26th birthday occurred before the effective date of the veteran's permanent and total disability rating.

The Board found that the veteran's current degenerative joint disease of the lumbar spine was not incurred in or aggravated by service, and arthritis may not be presumed to have been so incurred. The claim for a pulmonary disability was remanded due to insufficient evidence.

The Board has granted service connection for a chronic headache disorder and found that the veteran's current sinusitis/allergies, positive TB test, fibroadenoma of the left breast (claimed as breast biopsy), high blood pressure, and other conditions are not related to her military service.

The Board found that the veteran's preexisting asthma was not aggravated by service, and thus denied his claim for service connection.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for chronic bronchitis, asthma, and tinnitus. The evidence did not support a finding of in-service exposure to asbestos or other conditions that could be linked to these disabilities.

The Board has determined that additional action is required to address the veteran's claims, including obtaining VA treatment records and providing a medical examination. The case will be remanded for these actions.

The veteran's service-connected disabilities do not meet the criteria for a compensable evaluation.,The veteran's service-connected disabilities are not shown to preclude him from performing substantially gainful employment consistent with his educational and occupational background.

The Board has determined that the evidence received since the April 1968 rating decision is not new and material, and thus does not reopen the veteran's service connection claim for bronchitis and associated chest pain.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for bronchitis and sinus disorders.

The Board has ordered a new VA examination and additional VCAA notice due to the inadequacy of previous examinations. The claim for service connection for chronic bronchitis remains pending.

The Board found that the veteran's claimed conditions, including right knee arthritis, left knee disability, pulmonary disability (bronchitis and asthma), bilateral hearing loss disability, tinnitus, and psychiatric disability other than PTSD, were not incurred or aggravated by service. The evidence did not establish a nexus between any of these conditions and service.

The VA has determined that the veteran's chronic bronchitis does not warrant a rating higher than 30 percent, as there is no evidence of restricted lung function or other complications.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claimed disabilities, including coronary artery disease, COPD, chronic bronchitis, and peripheral neuropathy of the upper and lower extremities, are not service-connected due to a lack of evidence linking these conditions to his military service. The presumptive provisions for Agent Orange exposure do not apply as these conditions are not listed among those diseases presumed to be associated with such exposure.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development due to the need for VA examinations and consideration of new evidence.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the relationship between the veteran's inservice respiratory treatment and his current chronic bronchitis. The veteran is also entitled to additional notice under Dingess/Hartman v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 473 (2006).

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for chronic bronchitis. The case is now remanded for further development.