Diabetes decisions — 2010

The Board denied an increased rating for diabetes mellitus, finding that the Veteran's condition did not meet the criteria for a higher rating based on his need for insulin injections and dietary restrictions.

The Veteran's diabetes mellitus type II is currently evaluated at 20 percent, and the claim for an increased evaluation has been granted.

The Veteran's claim for special monthly compensation based on aid and attendance was granted with an effective date of September 8, 2005. The claim for automobile and adaptive equipment or for adaptive equipment only was denied as the evidence did not meet the criteria for loss of use of either hand or foot.

The Veteran's claims of service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II, hypertension, and an eye disorder have been denied as there is no evidence of in-service exposure to herbicides or other causative factors.

The Veteran's service-connected diabetes requires insulin, a restricted diet, and regulation of activities. The Board finds that the criteria for a 40 percent evaluation are met.

The Veteran's diabetes mellitus type II is presumed to be related to his exposure to herbicides during service in the Republic of Vietnam, and he was granted service connection for this condition.

The Veteran's diabetes mellitus requires insulin and a restricted diet, but does not require regulation of activities. The Board finds that an evaluation in excess of 20 percent is not warranted.

The VA determined that the veteran's diabetes mellitus, type II, with erectile dysfunction warrants a 40 percent evaluation, but not higher. The evidence did not meet the criteria for a higher rating under Diagnostic Code 7913.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's diabetic retinopathy does not warrant a compensable disability rating. The reduction of his diabetes mellitus rating from 40% to 20% effective April 1, 2005 was proper as there had been no sustained material improvement in symptoms attributable to this disability.

The Board denied service connection for diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and abdominal aortic aneurysm, finding no evidence of direct service connection or any recognized presumptive conditions related to ionizing radiation exposure.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for diabetes mellitus and a heart disorder, finding no evidence of such conditions during or within one year after service. The Board also found insufficient medical evidence to establish a link between these disabilities and military service.

The Board found that the Veteran's diabetes mellitus is not related to service, and his retinopathy and peripheral neuropathy are not related to service or a service-connected disability.

The Veteran's diabetes mellitus, type 2, is presumed to have been incurred during service due to exposure to Agent Orange.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining deck logs of the USS HOEL to determine if the Veteran was present on inland waterways of the Republic of Vietnam during his service. The claim will be reconsidered based on all evidence.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities render him in need of regular aid and attendance, warranting special monthly compensation based on this need.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for a more contemporaneous VA examination and consideration of his TDIU claim.

The Veteran's service-connected diabetic nephropathy with hypertension is rated at 30 percent, and the Board finds no evidence to warrant a higher rating.

The Board has remanded the claims of service connection for diabetes mellitus, asbestosis, and back injuries due to a lack of evidence showing these conditions were incurred during or aggravated by military service. The presumption of exposure to Agent Orange does not apply.

The Board denied service connection for type 2 diabetes mellitus with neuropathy, finding no evidence of a diagnosis during service or within the first year after separation, and rejecting the presumption of exposure to Agent Orange.