Prostate cancer decisions — 2003

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for prostate cancer, a bilateral lower leg disorder, increased ratings for lumbar muscle strain and hearing loss of the left ear, and total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities. The issues have been remanded for further development.

The Board found no evidence of exposure to ionizing radiation or herbicides during service, and the veteran's prostate cancer was not shown to be related to any in-service event. The claim for service connection is denied.

The Board has ordered further development due to pending issues and is remanding the case back to the RO for additional consideration.

The Board has determined that the veteran's prostate and colon cancers are not related to his service, including any exposure to ionizing radiation. The claims for service connection have been denied.

The veteran requested to withdraw his appeal regarding the claim for service connection for prostate cancer, and the Board dismissed the appeal.

The veteran's claim for an increased evaluation of his service-connected cervical spine disability is being remanded due to the need for additional evidence and consideration under new rating criteria. The issue of service connection for headaches, which was deferred, will also be referred back to the RO.

The veteran's appeal has been withdrawn, and the case is dismissed.

The Board has determined that additional development is necessary before a decision can be made on the appellant's claim for service connection of the cause of her husband's death. The case must be remanded to ensure proper notification and assistance under the VCAA, obtain relevant medical records from Drs. Stephenson and Page, and provide a VA medical opinion regarding the nature and etiology of the veteran's prostate cancer.

The Board has granted a 100% evaluation for the service-connected diastasis recti and increased the rating to 20% for the residuals of prostate cancer with stress incontinence, nocturia, and impotence.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for specially adapted housing or a special home adaptation grant, financial assistance in the purchase of an automobile and adaptive equipment, and special monthly compensation based on the need for aid and attendance.

The Board has remanded the case for a medical opinion regarding whether the veteran's cause of death is related to his service and any pre-existing conditions.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for prostate cancer and whether new and material evidence has been received to reopen a claim of entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss.

The Board has determined that the veteran's bladder cancer is not related to his service or service-connected prostate cancer, and thus denied the claim for service connection.

The Board found that there is no evidence linking the veteran's lung disorder and prostate cancer to his military service or asbestos exposure, thus denying both claims.

The Board has reopened the appellant's claim for service connection for the cause of her husband's death due to exposure to Agent Orange, and finds that prostate cancer, a disease associated with such exposure, presumptively incurred during active military service, contributed substantially or materially to his death.

The Board has restored the veteran's previous 100% evaluation for service-connected prostate cancer, effective November 7, 1996.

The veteran's left ureteral calculus and prostate cancer have been rated based on their current manifestations, with the prostate cancer receiving a noncompensable rating since February 1, 1998.

The veteran seeks service connection for prostate cancer, claimed as due to exposure to ionizing radiation. The case is being remanded due to procedural deficiencies in the initial decision and need for compliance with the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000.

The veteran's disability rating for prostate cancer was reduced from 100 percent to 20 percent effective October 1, 2002. The appeal is denied as the reduction was proper.

The Board has remanded the case due to a violation of Stegall v. West, and additional medical evidence was added without review by the RO.