Ischemic heart disease decisions — 2016

The Veteran's coronary artery disease does not meet the criteria for a higher rating, as his METs level is reported to be seven or greater and he has not shown congestive heart failure or left ventricular dysfunction with an ejection fraction of 30 to 50 percent.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for heart disorder, neck disability, and back disability are being remanded due to the need for further development regarding his Reserve service status and the need for additional medical opinions.

The Veteran's coronary artery disease was rated at 60% since September 2004, based on his ejection fraction of 60 percent and workload of 5 to 7 METs resulting in dyspnea, fatigue, angina, dizziness or syncope.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining private treatment records and medical opinions regarding the Veteran's heart disorder and cause of death.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities have resulted in unemployability, and the Board has granted a total disability rating based on individual unemployability.

The Veteran did not submit a claim for coronary artery disease prior to June 19, 2000. Therefore, the effective date cannot be earlier than that date.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for a heart disability, including arrhythmia, atrial fibrillation, and congestive heart failure is being remanded due to the need for additional development of his medical records.

The Board has granted service connection for an eye condition characterized as left eye macular scar and bilateral cataracts secondary to service-connected sarcoidosis, resolving reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran.

The Veteran's claim for a TDIU is being remanded due to the need for additional medical examination and consideration of evidence regarding his heart condition and leg swelling.

The Veteran's hypertensive heart disease was rated at 30 percent prior to December 24, 2015 and at 60 percent from that date forward. The Board denied an increased rating for the condition.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for various conditions, including respiratory disorder, vision disorder, back disability, sarcoidosis manifestations, heart disorder, diabetes mellitus, autoimmune disease, sleep apnea, black outs, and bilateral hearing loss. The evidence did not meet the criteria for direct service connection.

The Board has scheduled a hearing for the Veteran, but due to his work commitments, he requested a rescheduled hearing. The case is now remanded for scheduling this rescheduled hearing.

The Veteran's claim for SMC based on the need for regular aid and attendance was denied as he did not meet the schedular criteria for such benefits.

The Board finds that the evidence does not support a finding of service connection for chest pain or heart disease.

The Board is remanding the case to consider whether the Veteran's service in Da Nang Harbor qualifies as in-country service for purposes of herbicide exposure, and to determine if he is entitled to service connection for ischemic heart disease and diabetes mellitus due to such exposure.

The Veteran's claim for TDIU is being remanded due to the need for a new VA examination and additional development of his medical records.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not meet the criteria for service connection for any of the claimed conditions, including a heart disorder, psychiatric disorder (claimed as PTSD), stroke residuals, and respiratory disorder (COPD). The decision is based on the lack of evidence linking these conditions to service or any other relevant factors.

The Board finds that the evidence does not support a finding of service connection for chest pain or heart disease.

The Board has granted the Veteran's claim to reopen his service connection for bilateral knee osteoarthritis and secondary service connection for degenerative joint disease of the lumbosacral region. The heart disability and bilateral hearing loss disability claims were dismissed due to withdrawal by the Veteran.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for scheduling a Travel Board hearing due to his request and the need to provide him with an opportunity to present his case in person.