Depression Board decisions

The veteran's claims for increased ratings were denied. The RO found that the veteran's major depression with psychotic features, with psychophysiological musculoskeletal reaction did not warrant a rating in excess of 30 percent prior to January 18, 2006 and 100 percent from that date. The calluses of both feet remained at 10 percent.

The Board finds that the veteran's psychiatric disorder is not associated with his service-connected post-operative residuals of a herniated nucleus pulposus at L5-S1, and thus denies the claim for secondary service connection.

The case is being remanded due to the submission of new evidence without a waiver, and the veteran was notified but did not waive consideration by the agency of original jurisdiction. The RO should readjudicate the claims in light of all pertinent evidence.

The Board has remanded the case for compliance with prior remand instructions, including providing proper VCAA notice and obtaining a VA examination to determine if the veteran's current psychiatric disabilities are related to service.

The Board has determined that the veteran's coronary artery disease was not incurred in or aggravated by active service, and is not proximately due to, or chronically aggravated by, his service-connected diabetes mellitus. The issues of PTSD and psychiatric disability other than PTSD have been remanded for further development.

The Board has determined that there is no competent evidence showing a link between the veteran's bipolar disorder and his military service, including any in-service sexual assault. As such, the claim for service connection is denied.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for chronic fatigue syndrome, hypertension (claimed as secondary to fibromyalgia medications), and depression. The evaluation for fibromyalgia was reduced from 100 percent to 40 percent.

The veteran's PTSD with major depressive disorder resulted in occupational and social impairment, warranting a 70 percent evaluation since June 30, 2004.

The Board found that the veteran's claims for an increased disability rating and TDIU were not factually ascertainable prior to March 15, 2000. As such, the effective dates of these ratings are set at the date of receipt of the claim (March 15, 2000).

The Board has granted service connection for depression as secondary to the veteran's service-connected azoospermia with infertility. The initial rating for azoospermia with infertility remains at 20 percent, effective April 27, 2005.

The veteran's depression has been rated at 70 percent disabling, and his dry eye syndrome is assigned a noncompensable rating. The Board also found that the veteran meets criteria for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities.

The Board found that the veteran does not have PTSD and denied his claim for service connection.

The Board found that the veteran's claimed psychiatric and rash conditions were not incurred or aggravated by service, and denied both claims.

The Board denied service connection for the cause of the veteran's death and eligibility for Dependent's Educational Assistance under Chapter 35 due to lack of evidence linking the suicide to service.

The Board has granted service connection for PTSD based on a verified in-service stressor, and the claim of reopening the depression claim is remanded.

The Board has determined that additional development is required before deciding the veteran's claim for service connection for depressive disorder or other acquired psychiatric disorder.

The Board has determined that the injuries sustained on June 21, 1986 were incurred in the line of duty and granted service connection for all claimed conditions.

The Board found that the veteran's diabetes mellitus, type II is not service-connected and denied his claims for hypertension, PTSD, and depression.

The Board found no evidence of a chronic psychiatric disorder in service and denied the claim for service connection for depression as secondary to service-connected rheumatic fever.

The Board has determined that further development is needed regarding the veteran's claims for service connection due to conflicting medical evidence and a need for clarification on the type of disability rating and effective date in the event of an award.