Veterans’ RightsAn independent resource for veterans
← All decisions
DeniedPACT Act

The Veteran's tinnitus was not related to his active service and did not manifest within one year after separation from active service.,The Veteran's diabetes mellitus is presumed due to exposure to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune, but it is not considered a presumptive condition. The Board found no evidence that the diabetes caused by exposure to contaminated water was related to his active service.,The Veteran's right leg amputation is not causally or etiologically related to his service-connected cellulitis and is presumed due to his diabetes mellitus, which is also presumed due to Camp Lejeune exposure. The Board found no evidence that the amputation was caused by cellulitis.,The Veteran's hypertension is not considered a presumptive condition based on exposure to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune.

The deciding factor: The VA examiners provided opinions stating that the tinnitus did not have an onset in service and is not related to noise exposure during service. The Veteran’s STRs were silent for any concern, diagnosis, or treatment of tinnitus.,The VA examiner stated that diabetes mellitus was less likely caused by Camp Lejeune exposure as it is not considered a presumptive condition under the law. The Veteran's diabetes was diagnosed in 2000, almost two decades after service separation.,The VA examiner concluded that the right leg amputation is not due to cellulitis but rather related to the Veteran’s diabetes mellitus which developed from Camp Lejeune exposure and is presumed as a chronic disease under the law. The Board found no evidence of cellulitis causing the amputation.,The VA examiner stated that hypertension was not considered a presumptive condition based on exposure to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune.

Claimed conditions
tinnitus, diabetes mellitus, right leg amputation, hypertension
How they argued it
Presumptive (no nexus needed)
Exposure basis
Camp Lejeune water
Rating assigned
None in this decision
Decision date
July 15, 2020
Citation
20047462

This is a plain-language summary generated by AI from a public Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. It can contain errors — always verify against the original. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 20047462.

What this means for you

A denial is a starting point, not the end of the road. You can see why this claim fell short — and, if you are still inside the one-year window, the appeal lanes that may remain open to you.

What you can do next

Related decisions

Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.

Free starter guide for your own claim

Reading this because you were denied or under-rated? Get the plain-English next steps — your appeal options, the deadline that protects you, and how appeals like yours turn out. One email, no spam.

We will only use this to send the guide. No spam, unsubscribe any time. We never sell your information.

We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.

This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.