Diabetes decisions — 2005

The Board has determined that the veteran's diabetes mellitus is presumed to have been incurred as a result of his exposure to Agent Orange during service. The PTSD and major depressive disorder claims were denied due to lack of verified stressors and no medical evidence linking these conditions to service, respectively.

The veteran's claim for a higher rating and service connection was denied. The effective date of his TDIU is fixed at February 6, 2001.

The Board found no clear and unmistakable error in the May 1980 rating decision assigning a 20 percent rating for diabetes mellitus, but did not find clear and unmistakable error in the November 1996 rating decision. The effective date of the 100 percent rating remains January 5, 1998.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for chronic right and left knee disabilities, as well as his claim for diabetes mellitus. The veteran's diabetes mellitus was granted based on a current diagnosis.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA) has remanded the case for further development due to incomplete medical records and conflicting opinions regarding the veteran's diabetes mellitus.

The Board has determined that the cause of the veteran's death was not related to his military service and denied the claim for service connection.

The Board found that the veteran's Type II diabetes mellitus was not incurred in service and denied his claim for service connection, as there is no evidence of actual duty or visitation in Vietnam. The one-year presumptive period provided in VA regulations does not apply due to lack of exposure.

The Board has determined that the veteran's diabetes mellitus was not incurred in or related to his military service, and thus denied the claim.

The veteran's claim for service connection for Type II diabetes mellitus, including as due to Agent Orange exposure, is remanded due to uncertainty regarding his presence in Vietnam during the Vietnam Era.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for increased evaluations for diabetes mellitus and tinnitus, finding that the evidence does not support a higher evaluation under applicable VA rating criteria.

The veteran's claims for service connection for prostate cancer, diabetes mellitus, and multiple sclerosis as a result of herbicide exposure are being remanded due to the need for additional development regarding his claimed duty or visitation within the Republic of Vietnam.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete records from Social Security Administration and will provide an opportunity for the appellant to respond.

The VA denied the appellant's claim for service connection for the cause of her husband's death, concluding that no service-connected disability caused or contributed to his death.

The Board determined that appellant is not a 'veteran' entitled to VA disability benefits for diabetes mellitus because he was enrolled in Army ROTC under scholarship, which does not constitute active duty.

The Board found no evidence of Type II diabetes mellitus or PTSD, and the right shoulder injury was not service-connected. The veteran's claims were denied.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development of his claims, including obtaining medical records and clarifying whether he testified at any hearings.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for a Travel Board hearing at the RO in Boston, Massachusetts. The case will be returned to the Board after the hearing.

The Board denied the veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II, as a result of exposure to herbicides due to lack of current diagnosis.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for diabetes mellitus and associated peripheral neuropathy of both lower extremities, finding no evidence linking these conditions to his military service.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including a new VA examination to determine if the veteran's heart disease with hypertension is related to his service-connected diabetes mellitus, Type II. The RO must also issue a Statement of the Case addressing the increased rating claim for DM II.