Hypertension (high blood pressure) decisions — 2008

The Board finds that the veteran is eligible for payment or reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses incurred at Grady Memorial Hospital on January 10, 2005.

The Board denied service connection for the cause of the veteran's death due to squamous cell cancer of the neck and hypertension, as these conditions were not found to be related to his military service or a service-connected disability. The claim for DIC under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1318 was also denied because the veteran did not meet the criteria for receiving benefits based on a service-connected disability.

The Board has denied the appellant's claim for an earlier effective date for service connection of the cause of her husband's death due to hypertension, as the criteria are not met. The effective date remains August 7, 2005.

The Board found no evidence of cardiovascular disease, degenerative joint disease, glaucoma or ulcerated stomach during the veteran's active service period from November 1954 to November 1956. The claims for these conditions are therefore denied.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim of service connection for hypertension and found that new evidence submitted since December 2003 raises a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim. However, the Board denied the claim as there is no evidence showing that hypertension was present in service or within one year after service.

The Board finds that the veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for TDIU benefits cannot be granted as his informal claim was considered abandoned due to failure to provide requested evidence within one year of request. The benefit-of-the-doubt rule is not applicable.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed, including obtaining medical records and scheduling a VA examination to determine if the veteran's hypertension is being aggravated by his service-connected diabetes mellitus.

The veteran's claim for service connection is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including a new VA examination.

The Board has determined that the veteran's cardiovascular disease, including coronary artery disease, hypertension and atrial fibrillation, was aggravated by his service-connected PTSD. The veteran is also entitled to a 50 percent evaluation for his PTSD.

The Board has ordered additional development due to incomplete records and the need for further examination regarding the veteran's hypertension and heart condition.

The Board has ordered a new VA examination to assess the etiology and onset of the veteran's hypertension, particularly whether it is related to his service-connected diabetes mellitus, type II. The AOJ should obtain any outstanding VA medical records for treatment of hypertension from April 2006 to present.

The Board has ordered a remand for additional development, including obtaining an addendum opinion from the VA examiner who conducted the June 2008 examination to address whether the veteran's hypertension and heart disease are at least as likely as not related to service or secondary to his service-connected PTSD.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for cardiovascular disease, to include as secondary to diabetes mellitus and PTSD. The decision also addressed his request for TDIU but did not reach a final determination on this issue.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including a VA examination and proper VCAA notice.

The veteran's COPD has been rated at 10 percent, and the Board has granted a rating of 100 percent based on right ventricular hypertrophy and pulmonary hypertension.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for hypertension, asbestosis, and residuals of colorectal cancer (claimed as stomach problems) due to lack of evidence linking these conditions to his military service.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for hypertension and coronary artery disease, finding that new evidence did not raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claims.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including examinations to determine the etiology of any current sleep disorder, hypertension, and psychiatric disorder. The veteran's claims will be reconsidered based on the additional evidence.

The Board has determined that the veteran's hypertension does not meet or approximate the criteria for a higher rating, and thus denied his claim for an increased disability rating.

The veteran has withdrawn his appeal for all issues on appeal, including increased ratings for various conditions.