Peripheral neuropathy Board decisions

The veteran's claims for higher initial ratings for Type II Diabetes Mellitus, peripheral neuropathy of the arms and legs, and bilateral proliferative diabetic retinopathy were denied. The veteran was also denied service connection for a stroke secondary to his diabetes.

The veteran's appeal has been dismissed due to his death.

The veteran's service-connected disabilities were not continuously rated at 100% disabling for a period of ten years or more immediately preceding his death. Therefore, the criteria for entitlement to DIC benefits under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1318 are not met.

The Board has determined that the veteran's peripheral neuropathy does not warrant a rating in excess of 10 percent for either lower extremity, as the evidence shows mild symptoms rather than moderate.

The Board found that the veteran's residuals of fasciotomy of the right leg with right common peroneal and right posterior tibial neuropathy do not warrant a rating in excess of 10 percent.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has not been submitted to reopen the appellant's claim for service connection for the cause of the veteran's death. The issue remains on the substantive merits.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for low back disability, neuropathy in the upper extremities, and cataracts with secondary membrane in the left eye. The evidence does not support a finding of direct service connection for these conditions.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for erectile dysfunction and peripheral neuropathy, as well as his claim for an increased evaluation for PTSD. The veteran's conditions were not found to be related to his active service or service-connected diabetes mellitus.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claims for service connection for lumbar degenerative disc and joint disease, degenerative changes of the cervical spine, and neuropathy of the right leg. The appeals are granted as the evidence supports a finding that these conditions are related to military service.

The Board found that the veteran did not have peripheral neuropathy or hypertension in service, and these conditions are not related to his diabetes. Therefore, he was denied service connection for both disorders.

The Board finds that the evidence does not demonstrate that the veteran is unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation solely due to his service-connected disabilities, and therefore, entitlement to TDIU is denied.

The Board found no competent evidence linking the veteran's diagnosed conditions to his chemical exposure during service. The case is being remanded for further development of records from the VA medical center in Dallas, Texas.

The Board has remanded this case due to several issues, including the need for VA examination records and proper VCAA notice. The veteran's claims are currently on hold until these matters are addressed.

The Board granted service connection for diabetes mellitus and peripheral neuropathy of the hands and feet, but denied a higher initial evaluation. The veteran's diabetes is treated with oral hypoglycemic agents and restricted diet.

The Board has remanded the case to the RO for a hearing and further development.

The veteran's low back disability and associated peripheral neuropathy in the lower extremities have been granted increased evaluations, with a primary evaluation of 60 percent for his low back disability effective January 30, 2003.

The veteran's service-connected disabilities prevent him from securing and maintaining a substantially gainful occupation consistent with his education and occupational experience.

The Board denied service connection for various conditions, including residuals of right knee injury, right foot toenail injury, low back pain with neuropathy, and vision problems. The veteran's claims were not supported by current medical evidence or a link to his military service.

The veteran's claim for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities was denied as his combined evaluation of 40% does not meet the schedular requirements for assignment of a total disability rating. The RO considered whether he is unemployable solely due to his service-connected disabilities, but found that his occupational impairment is primarily due to non-service connected disabilities.

The Board denied all service connection claims, finding that the veteran's conditions were not incurred or aggravated by active service and did not have a nexus to any service-connected disability.