Hepatitis C decisions — 2006

The veteran's appeal for service connection for hepatitis C has been dismissed as the appellant requested withdrawal of the appeal.

The Board denied the veteran's claims of service connection for asthma, a vision problem with implanted contact lens, and left arm condition. The veteran was not diagnosed with these conditions during service or within one year after separation from service.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for higher initial ratings for hepatitis C and ulcerative colitis, finding that there were no periods of time during which his conditions warranted a rating greater than 20 percent or 60 percent, respectively. The appeals were based on service connection.

The Board found that the veteran's hepatitis C is related to his use of intravenous illegal drugs during active service and granted service connection for this condition.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including a VA examination and an addendum opinion to determine if the veteran's hepatitis C is related to his service as a medical corpsman.

The veteran's hepatitis C is rated at 30 percent disabling from January 1999, but the Board found that his disability does not warrant a higher rating.

The VA reduced the veteran's evaluation for Hepatitis C status post cirrhosis and liver transplant from 100 percent to 30 percent, finding that this reduction was procedurally and factually proper.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) has determined that the veteran's current diagnosis of hepatitis C is not related to his military service, and thus denied his claim for service connection.

The Board found that hepatitis C was not incurred in or aggravated by the veteran's active duty service and denied the claim for service connection.

The veteran's hepatitis C has been consistently reported as asymptomatic, and there is no evidence to suggest otherwise. Therefore, the criteria for a higher initial evaluation have not been met.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection of Hepatitis C and an effective date prior to January 6, 2003 for a 100 percent disability evaluation for PTSD. The Board found no evidence linking Hepatitis C to active duty service.

The Board has remanded the case for further action due to inconsistencies in medical opinions and need for additional evidence.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including a VA medical opinion on the relationship between the veteran's hepatitis C and his in-service symptoms.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have residuals of hepatitis C, an undiagnosed bacterial infection (claimed as a Lyme-type disease), or residuals of an immune deficiency disorder. The preponderance of evidence is against these claims.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for hepatitis C and an increased evaluation for anxiety reaction. The claim of service connection for hepatitis C was denied due to lack of evidence linking the current diagnosis to military service, while the anxiety reaction claim is pending as no recent VA examination provided objective findings warranting a higher rating.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for viral hepatitis and hepatitis C, finding no evidence of chronic residuals or current disabilities related to service.

The Board has granted service connection for hepatitis and an increased rating for diabetes mellitus, both now rated at 20 percent. The veteran's hepatitis is found to be related to his active duty service.

The VA Board found no evidence linking the veteran's current hepatitis C infection with cirrhotic changes to his service, and thus denied the claim for service connection.

The veteran's claims for an increased evaluation and earlier effective date for service connection of Hepatitis C are being remanded due to procedural issues.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for hepatitis C with cirrhosis and increased ratings for his left knee disability and right ear hearing loss, finding that the evidence did not support a finding of service origin or aggravation.