Citation Nr: 20045950
Decision Date: 07/09/20	Archive Date: 07/09/20

DOCKET NO. 13-16 559
DATE: July 9, 2020

ORDER

Service connection for hypertension is granted.

FINDING OF FACT

The Veteran has a current diagnosis of hypertension as per Department of Veteran’s Affairs (VA) medical treatment records, e.g., April 2019 primary care follow-up visit; the Veteran had instances of high diastolic blood pressure noted while on active duty in January 2008 [146/98], June 2008 [146/90 & 128/90 (twice)], January 2009 [124/96], and March 2009 [130/90], per Naval Medical Center treatment records; and, although there are notations of normal diastolic blood pressure, the same Naval Medical Center notes additional high diastolic blood pressure readings after service (e.g., May 2010 [144/93] and March 2011 [162/90]) until she is noted as receiving treatment for hypertension from VA, see June 2011 primary care-provider initial visit, and there are numerous notations of treatment for hypertension throughout the Veteran’s VA treatment records until the present. [The Board observes the negative June 2017 VA nexus opinion, but cannot assign it significant probative weight due to being based on an inaccurate factual premise (e.g., the examiner noted “a single elevation of blood pressure,” but as noted above there was more than one instance.) Further, the examiner appeared to require a diagnosis in service vice evaluating when her symptoms began. Sellers v. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 265, 285 (2012) (“there is no requirement that a veteran be diagnosed in service for a disease to be service connected.”). The June 2017 examiner in the medical history section noted the Veteran was diagnosed with “with toxemia and premature birth.” The July 2017 addendum opinion appeared to clarify that this was in December 1999 which appears to better align with the evidence of record. See July 2017 email correspondence. Considering the negative addendum opinion concerning pregnancy-induced hypertension, the Board found it did not apply to the above analysis which focused on symptoms approximately 10 years later.] 

CONCLUSION OF LAW

Service connection for hypertension is warranted. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304, 3.307, 3.309. 

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

The Veteran served on active duty from July 1981 to July 1982 and from June 1985 to May 2009. 

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2009 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In February 2017, the Board remanded the claim for further development. In September 2018, the Board denied service connection for hypertension. The Veteran appealed the Board’s denial of hypertension to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans’ Claims (Veteran’s Court). In August 2019, the Veterans Court, in a Joint Motion for Partial Remand, vacated the hypertension denial and remanded the matter to the Board for re-adjudication. In  March 2020, the Board remanded the claim to obtain additional records and re-adjudication.

[CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE]

For the reasons explained above, the appeal is granted.

 

 

VICTORIA MOSHIASHWILI

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans’ Appeals

Attorney for the Board	David Arritt, Associate Counsel

The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.