Diabetes Board decisions

The Board found no credible evidence of a bilateral knee injury in service and denied the Veteran's claims for service connection.

The Veteran's service-connected hepatitis C and cirrhosis have been granted an initial rating of 10 percent. The Board has also found that the Veteran is unable to secure or follow substantially gainful employment due to his service-connected disabilities, granting a TDIU.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for diabetes mellitus type I, Parkinson's disease, essential tremors, and a pulmonary disorder due to herbicide exposure. The evidence did not establish that the Veteran served in Vietnam or was exposed to herbicides during his military service.

The Veteran's tinnitus was found to be related to his active service, and he is granted service connection for this condition.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for diabetes mellitus is being remanded due to the need for further development and review of new evidence.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining additional medical records and scheduling examinations to assess the severity of the Veteran's diabetes mellitus and his ability to work.

The Veteran's current diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus is considered to be service-connected due to exposure during the Vietnam Era, as he set foot in the Republic of Vietnam. The disability meets the criteria for a compensable rating.

The Veteran's esophageal cancer and diabetes mellitus are not service-connected due to lack of evidence linking these conditions to his military service, including presumed exposure to Agent Orange.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's diabetes mellitus, which was a significant condition contributing to his death, may be presumed to have been incurred in service. Service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death is granted.

The Veteran seeks service connection for hypertension as secondary to his service-connected diabetes mellitus. The VA examiner's opinion is inadequate, and the case is remanded for further development.

The Veteran's claims for service connection are being remanded due to inadequate notice and missing VA treatment records. The RO must provide proper notice letters, obtain relevant VA medical records, clarify the status of his missing service treatment records, and schedule him for a VA audiology examination.

The Veteran's diabetes mellitus is being remanded for further examination to determine its etiology and whether it was present within one year of separation from service.

The Veteran is granted a 100 percent evaluation for chronic renal insufficiency effective June 1, 2003. The claim for special monthly compensation based on the need for regular aid and attendance is denied.

The Veteran's claim for an initial disability rating in excess of 20 percent for service-connected diabetes mellitus, type II was denied. His claim for service connection for erectile dysfunction was also denied.

The Veteran's appeal includes claims for increased ratings for several service-connected disabilities and a TDIU. The RO has remanded these claims due to the need for further development, including reexaminations and consideration of additional evidence.

The Veteran's hypertension and vision problems are not related to service or a service-connected disability.

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

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining updated treatment records and scheduling a VA examination to determine if the Veteran's current sleep apnea is related to service or his service-connected diabetes mellitus.

The Board found the character of discharge for the period from September 13, 1999 to May 15, 2003 is not a bar to VA benefits. However, the character of discharge for the period from May 16, 2003 to July 30, 2007 is considered dishonorable and thus bars VA benefits.

The Board has dismissed the appeal due to the appellant's withdrawal of his appeal.