Diabetes decisions — 2010

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities do not meet the criteria for VA financial assistance for the purchase of one automobile and adaptive equipment or for adaptive equipment only, nor does he qualify for specially adapted housing due to his inability to perform essential activities of daily living without significant assistive devices.

The Board has determined that it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran's service-connected diabetes contributed to his development of hypertension, and thus grants service connection for hypertension.

The Veteran's claim for an increased evaluation for his service-connected diabetic macular edema is being remanded due to the need for additional VA examinations and updated medical records.

The Veteran's claim for a higher disability rating for his service-connected diabetes mellitus has been denied as there is no evidence that regulation of the Veteran's activities has been prescribed to treat his condition.

The Board has decided to remand the case for further development, including obtaining VA outpatient records and scheduling a VA examination to determine if hypertension is secondary to diabetes mellitus, type II or PTSD.

The Board has granted service connection for ischemic heart disease and denied the remaining issues of service connection. The Veteran is presumed to have been exposed to Agent Orange/herbicides, which supports his claim for ischemic heart disease.

The Veteran's diabetes mellitus with diabetic nephropathy is currently evaluated as 20 percent disabling. The evidence does not support a higher evaluation due to the lack of regulation of activities.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and service connection were denied. The Board found that the Veteran did not meet the criteria for an initial rating higher than 20 percent for diabetes mellitus prior to July 29, 2009, or a rating higher than 40 percent since then. Service connection was also denied for PVD, CAD, and peripheral neuropathy of both lower extremities.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, including sleep apnea syndrome and diabetes mellitus, have rendered him unable to secure or retain substantially gainful employment. However, the evidence does not indicate that his service-connected disabilities alone are sufficient to prevent him from obtaining such employment.

The Board has remanded the case for further development to ensure that all relevant evidence is considered and evaluated, including obtaining VA medical examinations and records.

The Veteran's TDIU claim is being remanded for further development, including obtaining medical records and scheduling a VA examination to assess the impact of his service-connected disabilities on his ability to work.

The Veteran's service-connected coronary artery disease, status post myocardial infarction and angioplasty and stent placement is granted. The issue of entitlement to a TDIU remains pending.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete verification of herbicide exposure during service, specifically in Panama Canal Zone and along the DMZ in Korea. The Veteran claims service connection for diabetes mellitus on a presumptive basis based on herbicide exposure.

The Board has determined that the submitted evidence does not relate to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claim and thus, new and material evidence has not been received. As a result, the appeal is denied.

The Veteran's claims of service connection for diabetes mellitus, circulatory problem (to include a heart disorder), and foot and leg disorders were denied as there is no evidence of in-service exposure to herbicides/Agent Orange or any other form of presumptive service connection. The Veteran was not found to have served on land in the Republic of Vietnam.

The Board has restored service connection for the Veteran's type 2 diabetes mellitus, finding that the evidence does not establish clear and unmistakable error in the original grant of service connection.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete records and additional evidence, as well as the need for a VA examination regarding the Veteran's renal cell carcinoma.

The Board has remanded the case for further proceedings due to inadequate examination and new claims related to secondary service connection.

The Board found that the Appellant did not have a period of active duty for training (ACDUTRA) or inactive duty training (INACDUTRA) after January 1978, and therefore could not establish service connection for diabetes mellitus, hypertension, or renal failure incurred during such periods. The claims were denied.

The Veteran's diabetes mellitus, type II, with diabetic retinopathy and peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral lower extremities was evaluated as 20 percent disabling prior to November 11, 2009. Since then, he has been rated at 40 percent for diabetes mellitus effective from that date.