Diabetes decisions — 2011

The Board has reopened the Veteran's claim of service connection for type II diabetes mellitus and granted it, finding that new evidence supports a finding of herbicide exposure during service which is indicative of a history of such exposure. As diabetes mellitus is a disease associated with herbicide exposure, the claim is granted.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for hypertension and TDIU due to his service-connected disabilities. The combined disability rating is 60% from June 20, 2002, and 100% from July 11, 2005.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient notice and a need for additional development, including obtaining medical records and determining if service connection is warranted.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's service-connected disabilities rendered him unemployable as of September 12, 2001. Effective November 14, 2002, his TDIU was granted with a rating of 50 percent.

The Veteran's hypertension and diabetes were not granted service connection due to lack of evidence linking them to his military service. The Veteran's current evaluation for diabetes mellitus was also denied.

The Veteran's claim for a higher rating for his service-connected diabetes mellitus, type II is being remanded due to the need for additional development and examination.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for diabetes mellitus, Type II, and for increased ratings for stasis dermatitis and stasis edema of the lower extremities, as well as scars, were denied. The Board found that there was no evidence to support a finding of herbicide exposure during service or any link between active duty service and the Veteran's current conditions.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for diabetes mellitus type II, including as secondary to exposure to herbicides in service, is being remanded due to the need to verify if Agent Orange was present on his ship during his service.

The Veteran's diabetes, coronary artery disease, and nephropathy are not rated higher than the current levels. The Veteran is not entitled to a compensable rating for impotence or TDIU.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining additional medical records and ensuring compliance with the duty to assist. The Veteran's claims will be readjudicated after this is done.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding whether PTSD contributed to the Veteran's cause of death, and if so, whether it was service-connected.

The Board found that the Veteran's left nephrectomy was not service connected and denied his claims for secondary service connection.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for type II diabetes mellitus was denied as there is no evidence of the disease during active duty or within one year following discharge, and no competent evidence establishing herbicide exposure. The Board found that the preponderance of the evidence did not support the claim.

The Veteran's claims for diabetes mellitus type II, hypertension, heart disorder, dental disability, cataracts, and erectile dysfunction are denied as there is no evidence of in-service incurrence or a relationship to service.,There is no current diagnosis of a dental disability. The Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of diabetic neuropathy. Service connection for these conditions cannot be granted on a direct basis due to lack of evidence of an in-service injury, disease, or event and the absence of medical records showing treatment within one year after service.,The Board finds that diabetes mellitus type II is not related to active service as there is no evidence of its onset during service. The Veteran's blood pressure readings were normal at separation from service and post-service hypertension was first diagnosed years later.,Service connection for a heart disorder, cataracts, and erectile dysfunction cannot be granted on a secondary basis because diabetes mellitus type II is not a service-connected disease.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for various conditions, including lumbar spinal stenosis, Adie's tonic syndrome (right eye), nasal deformity, GERD, keratosis, right trapezius muscle spasms (claimed as right shoulder pain), cervical strain, obstructive sleep apnea, thrombosed hemorrhoids, bladder disorder, prostate disorder, basal cell carcinoma, and diabetes mellitus, type II. The Board found that the evidence did not support service connection for any of these conditions.

The Veteran's service-connected diabetes and knee disabilities do not render him permanently and totally disabled for pension purposes as he is able to engage in substantially gainful employment.

The Board finds that the Veteran's diabetes mellitus was not incurred in service, including as due to herbicide exposure. The objective evidence does not support his claim.

The Veteran's claims are being remanded for additional development, including obtaining updated VA treatment records and scheduling the Veteran for examinations to assess his diabetes mellitus and retinopathy.

The Veteran's diabetes mellitus was not shown to have had its onset during service or within the required presumptive period, and there is no evidence of herbicide exposure. The Board denied service connection for diabetes mellitus.

The Board has denied the appellant's claim for an apportionment of her husband's VA compensation benefits, finding that he was reasonably discharging his responsibility for her during their separation and thus no basis exists for a 'general' apportionment. However, there is no hardship shown to warrant a 'special' apportionment.