Diabetes decisions — 2010

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for diabetes, hypertension, and a left foot disorder due to lack of new and material evidence. The amputation of the right foot was found not incurred in or aggravated by active service.

The Board found that the evidence was at least in equipoise as to whether the Veteran's currently diagnosed diabetes mellitus had its onset during service, and granted service connection for this condition.

The Board has remanded the case for further development and review, including obtaining SSA records and ensuring proper notification and development under applicable law.

The Board denied the claim of service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death, finding no new and material evidence to reopen the claim. The appellant submitted allegations regarding PTSD but these were not considered material as they were based on a previously adjudicated fact (Veteran was not a former POW).

The Veteran's claims for service connection for a bilateral knee disorder, diabetes mellitus, and posttraumatic stress disorder were denied. The Board found no evidence of current diagnoses or service connection for these conditions.

The Veteran's claim for special monthly compensation based on the need for aid and attendance is being remanded due to the need for additional VA examinations and consideration of all service-connected disabilities.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for type II diabetes mellitus and peripheral neuropathy of the lower extremities were denied as there is no evidence to support a direct relationship with military service, including exposure to herbicides. The Board found that the Veteran did not have actual duty or visitation in Vietnam, thus precluding presumptive service connection based on herbicide exposure.

The Veteran's representative withdrew all appeals regarding the increased rating for diabetes mellitus, type II.

The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for service connection for diabetes mellitus is granted, with the effective date set at April 11, 1985.

The Veteran's claim for a TDIU rating is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining updated medical records and scheduling a VA examination.

The Veteran's diabetes mellitus is currently rated at 40 percent, effective October 2, 2006. The disability requires insulin and a restricted diet for control.

The Veteran's diabetes mellitus, Type II and asthma were not incurred in or aggravated by active service.,The Veteran was denied service connection for these conditions.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for diabetes mellitus, Type II, due to herbicide exposure is being remanded for additional development.

The Board has granted service connection for diabetes mellitus, finding that the Veteran set foot in Vietnam during his service and is presumed to have been exposed to herbicides. As a result, the claim is granted.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for diabetes mellitus, Type II, including as due to exposure to Agent Orange in service. The evidence did not support a finding of in-service exposure to Agent Orange and there was no current diagnosis of DM during service or within one year after separation.

The Board denied the appellant's claims for accrued benefits and Dependency and Indemnity Compensation due to the severance of service connection for diabetes mellitus, as well as her request for retroactive payment based on an earlier effective date.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings for posttraumatic stress disorder and diabetes mellitus, type II, as well as his claim for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities are being remanded for additional development.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for a Travel Board hearing. The claims of service connection and disability rating will be further evaluated after the hearing.

The Veteran's prostate disorder, diabetes mellitus, and acquired eye disorders are not shown to be related to his service. The Board finds that the preponderance of evidence is against these claims.

The Board has remanded the case to the RO for further development due to a failure to comply with VA procedures for verifying herbicide exposure.