Diabetes decisions — 2014

The Board found that the Veteran's diabetes mellitus and right foot disability were not service-connected, and thus denied both claims. The decision also noted that there was no evidence of herbicide exposure during service.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's claimed conditions are not related to his active service, and therefore denied all claims for service connection.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining updated VA treatment records and a supplemental opinion from Dr. B. F.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities do not preclude him from securing and following a substantially gainful occupation.

The Veteran was granted service connection for diabetes mellitus, type 2 due to herbicide exposure. Service connection for PTSD and prostatitis were denied as there is no credible evidence of a current diagnosis or in-service stressor.

The Veteran's initial claim for an increased evaluation of type 2 diabetes mellitus was denied, and his service connection claim for hepatitis C was also denied.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development, including a VA examination to determine the nature and likely etiology of his sleep apnea, with specific focus on whether it is related to his period of service or due to his service-connected diabetes mellitus.

The Veteran's TDIU claim is being remanded due to the need for a VA examination to assess his employability in light of his service-connected disabilities.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining medical records and contacting the Social Security Administration.

The Veteran's diabetes mellitus has been granted service connection and is currently rated at 20 percent, effective from April 9, 2006.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate opinion regarding the cause of death and its relation to service. The appellant's claim for DIC benefits is being returned for further development.

The Board found no competent and credible evidence indicating that the Veteran's type II diabetes mellitus is etiologically related to service, specifically his National Guard service at Canadian Forces Base Gagetown. The Board concluded that there was insufficient evidence to link the Veteran's current diabetes to his exposure to herbicides or any other form of service.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining deck logs from the USS DEHAVEN (DD 727) and determining if the Veteran was exposed to Agent Orange during his service in Vietnam. The claims will be readjudicated after this additional development.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's diabetes mellitus, type II, is due to his service-connected right knee disability and grants this claim.

The Board has determined that the Veteran did not serve in Vietnam and therefore cannot establish herbicide exposure. The claims for service connection for diabetes mellitus, Type II; neuropathy of the lower extremities; hypertension; vision disorders (glaucoma and diabetic retinopathy); and erectile dysfunction are denied as they do not meet the criteria for direct service connection.

The Veteran's claims of service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II; bilateral upper and lower extremity peripheral neuropathy; and hypertension were denied as his claimed conditions are not related to his military service.

The Board found that the Veteran's diabetes mellitus was not incurred in or aggravated by service and may not be presumed to have been incurred in service. The claim is therefore denied.

The Veteran's current diagnosis of diabetes mellitus type II is considered to be related to his exposure to herbicides in service, specifically during his temporary duty assignment in the Republic of Vietnam. As he set foot in Vietnam and was exposed to herbicide agents, he meets the criteria for presumptive service connection.

The Veteran's claims for service connection were denied. The Board found that high cholesterol is not a disability for VA purposes and the other conditions are not related to his active service or any incident of service.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to adjudicate the Appellant's claims of entitlement to service connection for her husband's death, including asbestos exposure. The case is REMANDED for further development.