Hepatitis C decisions — 2017

The Veteran's hepatitis C was initially evaluated as noncompensable prior to March 21, 2012. On and after that date, the evidence shows cirrhosis of the liver resulting in abdominal pain but no other symptoms. The Veteran is now rated at 10 percent for his hepatitis C with cirrhosis.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's hepatitis C is not related to his military service, and thus denied his claim.

The Veteran's current hepatitis C is found to be related to his in-service sexual activity, meeting the criteria for service connection.

The Veteran's claims for earlier effective dates and service connection were denied. The Board found that the March 2009 denial of PTSD was not final, but his claim to reopen this denial is considered a downstream issue which does not require VCAA notice.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have a current disability related to tuberculosis, hepatitis C, or hepatitis A and B. The positive PPD test is considered a laboratory finding rather than a compensable disability.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development, including obtaining SSA records and VA treatment records, as well as an addendum medical opinion regarding the etiology of his impotence. The case will be readjudicated after these actions.

The Board has determined that further development is necessary before the case can be properly adjudicated, including obtaining an addendum opinion from a VA examiner regarding the service connection for hepatitis C.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development, including scheduling a VA examination to determine the etiology of his current hepatitis C disability and considering whether hepatitis C is an additional disability resulting from VA treatment in 2009. The issue of entitlement to compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for right ankle disability and hepatitis C as a result of treatment by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in 2009 must also be remanded.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection of Hepatitis C, diabetes mellitus, type II, and hypertension as they are not related to his active duty service.

The Board found that the Veteran's claim for service connection for Hepatitis C was denied as there was no evidence to support a finding of in-service exposure or causation.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's hepatitis C is not etiologically related to his active duty service and therefore denied the claim for service connection.

The Veteran's hepatitis C has been rated at 10 percent, and the Board is remanding the case for a more detailed evaluation to determine if his condition warrants an increased rating.

The Veteran's hepatitis C is rated at 20 percent prior to March 27, 2012. The Board finds that a higher rating is not warranted for this condition. For prostatic urethritis, the Veteran is granted a 60 percent rating effective February 4, 2010 (the date of his reopened claim).

The Veteran's TDIU claim was granted effective June 18, 2014 on an extra-schedular basis due to his service-connected disabilities.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal for service connection of hepatitis C.

The Veteran was not found to be permanently and totally disabled due to nonservice-connected disabilities from August 22, 2007, to September 29, 2016.

The Board found that the Veteran's hepatitis C was not incurred in or aggravated by service, and denied his claims for higher ratings for his acquired psychiatric disorder and foot disabilities. The TDIU claim was also denied as it pertained to a period prior to September 24, 2010.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not meet the criteria for service connection for hypercalcemia, hepatitis C, a skin disability (dermatophytosis of the foot), left shoulder disability, allergic rhinitis, hyperparathyroidism, back disability, or sleep disorder. The evidence does not establish an in-service injury or disease that could be linked to these conditions.

The Veteran's service-connected conditions do not render him unable to obtain or maintain substantially gainful employment, and his TDIU claim is denied.

The Board has denied the claim for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities (TDIU).