Ischemic heart disease decisions — 2017

The Veteran's claim for service connection for ischemic heart disease was denied as there is no evidence of herbicide exposure and the condition is not related to his military service.

The Board has determined that further development is needed to adjudicate the Veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for a heart condition. The case is REMANDED for the following actions: obtaining updated VA treatment records, scheduling an appropriate VA cardiology examination, and readjudicating the claim.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's claims for service connection of hypertension and coronary artery disease as secondary to hypertension have not been reopened due to lack of new and material evidence.

The Veteran's service-connected coronary artery disease with permanent implanted cardiac pacemaker did not meet the criteria for a higher rating, as his symptoms were within the range of normal physical activity and he had no evidence of significant heart dysfunction.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for additional development, including a more contemporaneous VA examination applying both pre and post January 12, 1998 rating criteria.

The Board has granted service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding that the Veteran's current conditions are at least as likely as not related to his active duty service. The claims for prostate cancer, diabetes mellitus, and coronary artery disease have been remanded due to insufficient evidence regarding their etiology.

The Board found that the Veteran's heart disability and bilateral knee disability were not incurred in or aggravated by service, nor did they manifest to a compensable degree within one year of separation from service.

The Board has remanded the claims for service connection due to incomplete medical records and need for additional examination.

The Board has determined that further development is needed to verify the Veteran's exposure to herbicides while serving on the U.S.S. Goldsborough, and thus remands the case for such development.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities resulted in the need for regular aid and attendance of another person, warranting special monthly compensation based on aid and attendance.

The Veteran's appeal for a higher evaluation and restoration of his 60 percent evaluation for coronary artery disease was denied. The issues regarding the propriety of reducing his evaluation from 60 to 30 percent were also denied.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have current diagnoses for most of his claimed conditions and there is no evidence linking these conditions to service. Service connection is denied.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development, including verification of herbicide exposure and a VA examination to determine the relationship between tinnitus and service.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities do not render him unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has not been received to reopen the Veteran's claims for service connection for cataract of the right eye and heart disease. The claims are therefore denied.

The Board has determined that the Veteran is unemployable due to his service-connected disabilities from June 28, 2012.

The Board denied an earlier effective date for SMC benefits based on the need for aid and attendance or housebound status, finding that neither the Veteran's coronary artery disease nor his PTSD acting alone rendered him unable to maintain reasonably gainful employment prior to February 25, 2011.

The Veteran's service-connected PTSD has resulted in total occupational and social impairment from April 14, 2009 onwards. The effective date for the 100% rating is set at April 14, 2009.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed for the Veteran's claims, including obtaining line-of-duty determinations and VA examinations to assess his service-connected disabilities. The TDIU claim is also inextricably intertwined with the other issues.

The Board has remanded this case for further development due to a lack of information regarding whether the Veteran set foot in Vietnam while serving aboard the USS Sea Fox. The appellant's claim will be readjudicated based on all available evidence.