Sleep apnea decisions — 2018

The Veteran's initial rating for sleep apnea was denied, and the termination of his 30% rating for restrictive lung disease was upheld. A disability rating of 60% was granted for hypothyroidism from September 6, 2006 to January 23, 2013, and a TDIU was granted during this period.

The Veteran's claims to reopen service connection for diabetes, left knee disability, left foot disability, OSA, and chronic obesity have been granted based on the receipt of new and material evidence. The appeals are remanded for further development in several areas.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the Veteran's claims for service connection for lower back strain and sleep apnea. The cases are being remanded for additional development.

The Board has granted service connection for hypertension but remanded the issue of service connection for obstructive sleep apnea due to a lack of a VA examination.

The Veteran's appeals for higher ratings and earlier effective dates for lumbosacral strain, PTSD, and right lower extremity radiculopathy have been withdrawn. The Board has dismissed these appeals.

The Board has decided to remand the cases for further development due to incomplete records and need for a new examination.

The Board has remanded the claims for acid reflux, Barrett’s esophagus, diabetes, high blood pressure, chronic sinusitis, and sleep apnea as a result of exposure to herbicides. The Veteran's private doctor records are needed, and VA examinations are required.

The Board has reopened the Veteran's previously denied claims for tinnitus, PTSD, and sleep apnea. The issues of service connection for bilateral hearing loss and eye injury have been remanded due to outstanding VA treatment records.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient evidence regarding whether the Veteran's sleep apnea with associated nocturnal hypoxemia is related to his service.

The Veteran's service-connected lumbosacral spine disability is currently rated at 10 percent and the Board finds that it does not warrant a higher rating.

The Board has reopened the Veteran's claims for service connection for various disabilities, but has remanded them for further development to clarify periods of active service and obtain medical opinions regarding the etiology of his claimed conditions.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities did not render him in need of regular aid and attendance or housebound status, as his nonservice-connected dementia was the primary cause of his need for assistance.

The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss is granted as service-connected. The remaining issues on appeal are remanded for further examination and development.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for depressive disorder also claimed as memory loss was granted. Other claims were remanded due to the need for additional evidence.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to a need for further development and consideration of the Veteran's claim for service connection for a low back disability.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims as they involve issues of service connection for various conditions, including sarcoidosis, hypertension, obstructive sleep apnea, and erectile dysfunction. The remand requires additional medical examination to determine if these conditions are related to service.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's obstructive sleep apnea is either caused or aggravated by his service-connected major depressive disorder, and therefore grants service connection for this condition as secondary to his service-connected depression.

The Board has remanded several service connection issues, including for cervical spine strain, headaches, PTSD, sleep apnea (OSA), and prostate condition (BPH).

The Board has found that VA did not substantially comply with the September 2017 Board remand and thus the case is being returned for further development to obtain missing treatment records.

The Board has remanded the cases for further development and examination as there are questions regarding the adequacy of the current evidence, particularly in relation to the Veteran's service connection claims.