Prostate cancer decisions — 2017

The Board has determined that the Veteran's prostate cancer did not manifest during service or within one year of separation, and there is no evidence of in-service exposure to herbicide agents. Therefore, the claim for service connection for prostate cancer cannot be granted.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including review of new evidence and possible VA examination. The Veteran's claims regarding reduction of disability rating and increased rating for prostate cancer will be reconsidered.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for prostate cancer, finding that there was no evidence of herbicide exposure and no in-service diagnosis or manifestation of prostate cancer.

The Veteran's appeal for service connection for prostate cancer has been dismissed due to the death of the appellant.

The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for prostate cancer service connection was denied as no claim was filed until February 24, 2014.

The Veteran's prostate cancer residuals are currently rated at 40 percent, and the Board finds that a higher rating is not warranted based on his symptoms of urinary frequency.

The Veteran's diabetes mellitus, peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral lower extremities, prostate cancer, erectile dysfunction, and Parkinson's disease are not shown to be related to his military service. The Board has determined that he was not exposed to herbicides during service.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's residuals of bladder cancer and prostate cancer are not attributable to his service, including exposure to asbestos while in service.

The Veteran's service connection for prostate cancer resulted in a grant of past-due benefits, leading to the payment of fees from those benefits. The Veteran is contesting the payment and seeks clarification on the process.

The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for a 60 percent rating for prostate cancer residuals was granted, with the effective date set at April 24, 2009.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining medical records and conducting a VA examination. The issues of service connection for bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, and prostate cancer are also being addressed.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has not been received to reopen the appellant's claim of entitlement to service connection for the Veteran's cause of death. The evidence submitted since the October 1999 rating decision is cumulative or does not relate to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claim.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and service connection have been denied. The Board has determined that a higher rating is not warranted for tinnitus, prostate cancer, skin cancer, respiratory impairment (emphysema), heart disability (coronary artery disease), hypertension, or systemic arthritis.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for increased ratings for insomnia and prostate cancer, finding that his symptoms did not warrant a higher rating under the applicable criteria. The Veteran's claim for a separate rating for a scar from intestinal surgery for ulcer perforation was also denied.

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

The Veteran's claims for service connection for diabetes and prostate cancer, both claimed to be related to exposure to herbicide agents during service, are denied as there is no evidence of such exposure.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for additional development, including examinations and verification of exposure to chemicals or herbicides.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for right and left elbow disabilities are being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining medical records and arranging for a VA examination.

The Veteran's appeal was dismissed due to his death, and no rating decision has been issued for the post-operative residuals of prostate cancer.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for additional evidence and an examination to determine the severity of his prostate cancer residuals, including renal dysfunction.