Erectile dysfunction decisions — 2015

The Board is remanding the case for further development to determine if the Veteran served in Vietnam during ACDUTRA and whether he was exposed to herbicides, specifically Agent Orange. The claims will be reconsidered based on this information.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, including anxiety disorder and prostate cancer residuals, do not prevent him from obtaining or maintaining any form of gainful employment.

The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for Erectile Dysfunction (ED) is denied. The earliest possible effective date assigned was March 6, 2014.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's claims for service connection have been denied. The decision does not specify which conditions or issues were denied, but it is clear from the context that all of the listed conditions and issues were addressed.

The Veteran's claim for an increased evaluation for his service-connected diabetes mellitus, type II, with erectile dysfunction, diabetic retinopathy, and cataracts is being remanded due to the need for a new VA examination.

The Veteran's left lower extremity radiculopathy has been granted a 20 percent rating, effective from December 2009. Service connection for erectile dysfunction as secondary to service-connected low back disability is also granted.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining SSA records and reviewing the claims file with additional evidence.

The Veteran's service-connected chronic epididymitis has been rated at 10 percent, and he is also entitled to special monthly compensation for loss of use of a creative organ.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims due to a need for further consideration by VA in light of updated criteria and procedures regarding herbicide exposure in Da Nang Harbor.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's erectile dysfunction is not caused or aggravated by any service-connected disability, including diabetes mellitus and PTSD. Therefore, the claim for service connection for erectile dysfunction is denied.

The Veteran's claims for increased evaluations and TDIU were denied. The Board found that the evidence did not support a higher evaluation for diabetes mellitus prior to June 23, 2009 or from then on, nor did it meet criteria for an evaluation in excess of 10 percent for degenerative changes of the hips.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities are of such a nature or severity to prevent him from obtaining or retaining all forms of substantially gainful employment.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and service connection were denied. The claim for an earlier effective date was also denied.

The Board found that the evidence did not support a finding of service connection for erectile dysfunction as secondary to PTSD with depression, panic disorder without agoraphobia, and alcohol abuse. The Veteran's current erectile dysfunction is attributed to his spine injury sustained during employment.

The Board found that the Veteran's hypertension and erectile dysfunction were not incurred or aggravated by service, including presumed exposure to herbicides in Vietnam. The evidence did not show a connection between these conditions and his diabetes mellitus.

The Veteran's claims for erectile dysfunction, rectal dysfunction and peripheral neuropathy of the lower extremities are being remanded due to insufficient examination reports. The VA needs to schedule a new examination to address these issues.

The Veteran's death was not caused by a service-connected disability, and the Veteran did not meet the criteria for DIC under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1318.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for a videoconference hearing before a Veterans Law Judge.

The Veteran is unable to obtain or maintain substantially gainful employment as a result of service-connected disabilities, and the Board finds that his TDIU request should be granted.

The Veteran's erectile dysfunction is currently rated at 20 percent from November 9, 2012 onward. The Board found that the evidence did not support a higher rating or an extraschedular evaluation.