Diabetes Board decisions

The Board found that the veteran's diabetes mellitus was incurred during service, resolving all doubts in his favor.

The Board found that the veteran's diabetes mellitus was aggravated by his service-connected multiple myeloma and granted service connection for this condition. The RO reduced the rating of the veteran's multiple myeloma from 100% to 30%, effective July 1, 1996.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for an increased evaluation for pterygium of the left eye and service connection for diabetic retinopathy. The TDIU claim was also denied due to insufficient evidence.

The Board denied the veteran's claims of entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and PTSD. The case is remanded for further examination and review.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for higher disability ratings for service-connected diabetes mellitus, finding that the criteria were not met under either the old or new rating criteria. The referral for an extra-schedular evaluation was also denied.

The Board has denied all claims of service connection and the claim for an increased rating for schizophrenia. The veteran's claims are not well grounded.

The veteran's claims for service connection for residuals of a fractured tailbone, residuals of frostbite of the feet, and residuals of fractured teeth are not well-grounded. The claim for diabetes mellitus secondary to frostbite of the feet is denied as it lacks legal merit. The claim for obstructive lung disease and chronic bronchitis secondary to nicotine dependence is granted with an evaluation of 30 percent.

The veteran is granted service connection for diabetes mellitus as it was manifested within one year of his discharge from active service and to a degree of at least 10 percent.

The Board has determined that the appellant's claims for service connection for diabetes mellitus, fatigue, skin disorder of the feet, and numbness of the extremities with loss of grip strength are not well grounded. The evidence does not support a finding of a nexus between these conditions and the appellant's period of active service.

The Board has ordered additional development to determine the percentage of impairment caused by each specific disability shown in the evidence, including recent medical records and updated financial information.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for secondary service connection for diabetes mellitus, finding that his PTSD did not cause or worsen his diabetes.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claims of service connection for a cardiovascular disorder, generalized arthritis, and diabetes mellitus are not well grounded. The evidence does not show these conditions during service or within one year after service, nor is there competent medical evidence linking them to service.

The Board denied the veteran's claims of service connection for diabetes mellitus with retinopathy, a vision disorder other than diabetic retinopathy, residuals of frozen feet, and disc disease of the upper and lower back. The claim for PTSD was granted but at a 70 percent evaluation.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for his service-connected diabetes mellitus and sarcoidal granulomas of both lower extremities with patches of alopecia, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating under the applicable schedular criteria.

The Board found no evidence linking the veteran's service-connected conditions to his death from acute myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, and diabetes mellitus. The claim is denied as not well-grounded.

The veteran's claim for service connection for diabetes mellitus was granted with an effective date of May 7, 1971. The Board found that the May 1971 VA Form 21-526 constituted a claim for service connection.

The Board found that there is no competent evidence linking the appellant's diabetes mellitus to Agent Orange exposure or any other incident of service, and similarly concluded that arthritis of multiple joints was not related to his period of active duty. The claim for an increased disability evaluation for PTSD was also denied as the current symptomatology did not meet the criteria for a 100% rating under either the pre- or post-November 1996 rating criteria.

The veteran's claim for an increased evaluation for diabetes mellitus was denied, and the appeal is dismissed as he did not file a timely substantive appeal.

The Board has determined that the veteran's notice of disagreement concerning his diabetes and retinopathy disorders was not timely filed, resulting in a denial of these claims.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for an evaluation in excess of 20 percent for diabetes mellitus and service connection for PTSD. The decision found that there was no competent medical evidence linking PTSD to a specific incident of service, making the claim not well grounded.