HYPERTENSION

YVETTE R. WHITE · 2026 · Case ID: A26038343

GRANTED

Summary

The Veteran, a Veteran who served from March 1978 to December 1984, appeals the denial of service connection for hypertension. The Veteran initially claimed hypertension in 2013, which was denied due to lack of an in-service diagnosis. A subsequent claim in May 2023, asserting secondary service connection to a depressive disorder, was also denied based on a negative VA medical opinion. In December 2024, the Veteran filed a supplemental claim for hypertension, submitting new evidence including a favorable VA medical opinion. The agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) denied readjudication, deeming the evidence not new and relevant. The Board, however, found the December 2024 evidence to be new and relevant, warranting readjudication. The Board reviewed the Veteran's service treatment records (STRs), which showed elevated blood pressure readings during service, although no formal hypertension diagnosis was documented. The Veteran also provided competent and credible lay statements regarding continuity of symptoms and treatment since service. The Board found that the in-service elevated blood pressure readings, combined with the Veteran's testimony and current diagnosis, placed the evidence in equipoise regarding the onset of hypertension during service. Applying the benefit of the doubt, the Board granted service connection for hypertension on the basis of continuity of symptomatology for a chronic disease.

Rationale

New and relevant evidence submitted in December 2024 warranted readjudication.; In-service elevated blood pressure readings noted.; Veteran provided competent and credible lay statements of continuity of symptomatology.; Evidence found to be in equipoise, resolving doubt in Veteran's favor.

Special Benefit

NO SPECIAL BENEFIT

Docket No.

250813-574121

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: A26038343
Decision Date: 04/23/26 Archive Date: 04/23/26

DOCKET NO. 250813-574121
DATE: April 23, 2026

ORDER

New and relevant evidence has been received, and the claim for entitlement to service connection for hypertension will be readjudicated.

Entitlement to service connection for hypertension is granted.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Evidence received with the December 2024 supplemental claim for service connection for hypertension is new and relevant.

2. Resolving reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, his hypertension is related to active service.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The criteria for readjudication of the claim for service connection for hypertension are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 5108, 7104(b), 7105(c); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.156 (d), 3.2501(a)(1).

2. The criteria for service connection for hypertension are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

The Veteran served on active duty from March 1978 to December 1984.

In December 2024, the Veteran submitted a VA Form 20-0995, Decision Review Request: Supplemental Claim, and requested readjudication of service connection for hypertension most recently addressed in a January 2024 rating decision. In April 2025, the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) issued the supplemental claim decision on appeal, which found that new and relevant evidence had not been received.

In the August 2025 VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement), the Veteran elected the Direct Review docket. Therefore, the Board must determine whether new and relevant evidence has been received based only on the evidence of record at the time of the December 2024 AOJ supplemental claim decision on appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.301.

The Board notes that the Veteran submitted an appellate brief along with the August 2025 VA Form 10182. However, the appellate brief did not present new evidence and is considered to be argument. Consequently, there is no prejudice to the Veteran in proceeding without clarifying whether he wanted to proceed on the Evidence docket. See Edwards v. McDonough, 36 Vet. App. 56 (2023).

Additionally, in a September 2025 docket letter provided the Veteran information on how he could request to switch his review dockets pursuant to Williams v. McDonough, 37 Vet. App. 305 (2024). The Veteran did not submit a request to switch dockets. However, the Board finds that the period to change AMA dockets per 38 C.F.R. § 20.202 (c)(2) has elapsed because it is one year since the AOJ decision on appeal has been issued. Consequently, the Board is able to adjudicate this claim.

1. New and Relevant Evidence to Reopen

The Veteran seeks to reopen a previously denied claim for service connection for hypertension. See December 2024 VA Form 20-0995,Supplemental Claim.

Legal Criteria

Generally, a final and unappealed decision issued by the AOJ may not thereafter be readjudicated and allowed. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(c). An exception exists if new and relevant evidence is presented or secured with respect to a claim which has been disallowed, then VA shall readjudicate the claim taking into consideration all of the evidence of record. 8 U.S.C. § 5108.

"New evidence" means evidence not previously part of the actual record before agency adjudicators. "Relevant evidence" means information that tends to prove or disprove a matter at issue in a claim and includes evidence that raises a theory of entitlement that was not previously addressed. 38 C.F.R. § 3.2501(a)(1).

Relevant Facts and Analysis

The Veteran initially filed a claim for service connection for hypertension in January 2013. The AOJ denied the claim in a December 2013 rating decision because the AOJ found that the Veteran's current hypertension was neither incurred in or caused by his active service.

The Veteran filed a claim to readjudicate the previously denied claim for service connection claim for hypertension in May 2023 and contended that service connection for hypertension should be granted as secondary to his service-connected depressive disorder.

In September 2023, the AOJ readjudicated the claim
claim and includes evidence that raises a theory of entitlement that was not previously addressed. 38 C.F.R. § 3.2501(a)(1).

Relevant Facts and Analysis

In September 2023, the AOJ readjudicated the claim and denied entitlement to service connection for hypertension on a secondary basis based on a negative VA medical opinion from August 2023.

The AOJ conducted a mandated special review of the Veteran's claim based on new information regarding the Veteran's non-deployment exposure to Toxic Exposure Risk Activity. However, the AOJ readjudicated the claim and denied the claim for entitlement to service connection for hypertension in a January 2024 rating decision based on a negative VA medical opinion.

In December 2024, the Veteran filed a supplemental claim for hypertension and included a favorable VA medical opinion. In April 2025, the AOJ denied readjudication of the claim for service connection for hypertension because it determined that the evidence submitted was not new and relevant.

The Veteran submitted a VA medical opinion that asserted that his hypertension began during his active service and the he continues to suffer from hypertension. The Board finds that this evidence is new because it was not before AOJ at the time of the January 2024 rating decision. This evidence is relevant because it provides a medical nexus between the Veteran's current hypertension and his active service.

Therefore, the Board recognizes new and relevant evidence has been received since the prior decision, warranting readjudication of the claim. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.156 (d), 3.2501(a)(1).

2. Service Connection for Hypertension

The Veteran seeks service connection for hypertension. See August 2025 VA Form 10182.

Legal Criteria

Service connection may be granted if the evidence demonstrates that current disability resulted from an injury suffered or disease contracted in active military, naval, or air service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). Establishing service connection generally requires competent evidence of three things: (1) current disability; (2) in-service injury or disease; and (3) a causal relationship between the two. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Consistent with this framework, service connection is warranted for a disease first diagnosed after service when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d).

Pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b), where a chronic disease, such as hypertension, is shown as such in service, subsequent manifestations of the same chronic disease are generally service connected; if a chronic disease is noted in service but chronicity in service is not adequately supported, a showing of continuity of symptomatology after separation is required.

Entitlement to service connection based on chronicity or continuity of symptomatology pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b) applies only when the disability for which the Veteran is claiming compensation is due to a disease enumerated on the list of chronic diseases in 38 U.S.C. § 1101(3) or 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a), which include hypertension. Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2013).

Blood pressure (BP) is measured in millimeters of mercury (mm Hg) and is written systolic over diastolic (for example 120/80 mm Hg). For VA purposes, "hypertension" means that diastolic blood pressure is predominately 90 mm Hg or greater or systolic blood pressure is predominately 160 or greater. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.104, Diagnostic Code 7101, Note (1).

Relevant Facts and Analysis

The first element of service connection has been met because the Veteran has a current diagnosis of hypertension. See December 2023 VA Hypertension Disability Benefits Questionnaire (DBQ).

Regarding the second element of service connection, an in-service incurrence, the Veteran's service treatment records (STRs) reflect several in-service blood pressure readings
(for example 120/80 mm Hg). For VA purposes, "hypertension" means that diastolic blood pressure is predominately 90 mm Hg or greater or systolic blood pressure is predominately 160 or greater. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.104, Diagnostic Code 7101, Note (1).

Relevant Facts and Analysis

The first element of service connection has been met because the Veteran has a current diagnosis of hypertension. See December 2023 VA Hypertension Disability Benefits Questionnaire (DBQ).

Regarding the second element of service connection, an in-service incurrence, the Veteran's service treatment records (STRs) reflect several in-service blood pressure readings. For instance, the Veteran's entrance examination indicates his blood pressure was 120/66. See December 1977 Report of Medical Examination, in STR-Medical. In October 1979, the Veteran's blood pressure increased to 130/80. See October 1979 STR. In March 1983, the Veteran's blood pressure was 116/76 and in April 1983, the Veteran's blood pressure was 122/88. During the Veteran's November 1984 separation examination, the Veteran reported symptoms of dizziness, fainting spells, and occasional light-headed headaches. See November 1984 Report of Medical History, in STR-Medical. The Veteran's blood pressure reading was 120/86. As such, the evidence demonstrates that the Veteran had elevated blood pressure readings, and that his blood pressure increased from the time of entrance until his discharge. Accordingly, the second element of service connection has been met.

Thus, the issue is whether there is a relationship between the Veteran's in service elevated blood pressure readings and his current hypertension.

The Board acknowledges the negative opinions obtained by VA in August 2023 and December 2023, which do not address the Veteran's in-service elevated blood pressure readings. Additionally, the examiners relied on the absence of evidence of an in-service diagnosis of hypertension to support their negative nexus opinions. As such, these opinions are not adequate for adjudication purposes. Similarly, the positive nexus opinion submitted by the Veteran in December 2024, is inadequate to grant the claim because the examiner did not provide any rationale or explanation for her conclusion.

Nevertheless, the Board finds sufficient evidence of continuity of symptomatology under 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b). Although the Veteran's STRs do not show a hypertension diagnosis, they confirm that the Veteran had relevant symptoms (namely, elevated blood pressure readings) during active duty. The Veteran reported that he was diagnosed with hypertension and began taking medication in 1984 shortly after leaving service. See December 2023 VA Hypertension Disability Benefits Questionnaire (DBQ).

The Veteran is competent to report about his medical history, to include hypertension or high blood pressure assessments given to him from treating clinicians and observable symptoms associated with hypertension. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377, n.4 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Thus, the Veteran has competently and credibly reported continuity of high blood pressure treatment since service. See Buchanan v. Nicholson, 451 F.3d 1331, 1337 (Fed. Cir. 2006). Thus, the Board assigns probative value to the Veteran's lay statements that are confirmed by the medical evidence.

Given the in-service elevated blood pressure readings, the Veteran's competent and credible lay statements that his symptoms have continued since service, and his current diagnosis, the Board finds that the evidence is at least in equipoise as to whether the Veteran's hypertension had its onset in service.

Thus, resolving all reasonable doubt in his favor, the Board finds that service connection for hypertension is warranted on the basis of continuity of symptomatology for a chronic disease. 38 U.S.C. § 5107.

Accordingly, the claim is granted.

YVETTE R. WHITE

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board G. Lilly, 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.

Analyze in VA Law Explorer