Ankle Board decisions

The Veteran's claim for service connection for multiple myeloma is granted due to exposure at Camp Lejeune. The claims for right ear hearing loss and left ankle disabilities are denied, while the claims for left ear hearing loss and right ankle disabilities are pending further review.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's alcohol use at the time of his November 2004 motor vehicle accident was a form of self-medication due to his service-connected PTSD. Therefore, service connection is granted for right foot/ankle disability and post-operative residuals of an abdominal injury.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate reasons and bases for denying a higher rating, specifically regarding functional loss due to pain and during flare-ups. The Veteran's right ankle disability is being requested to be evaluated again with consideration of these factors.

The Veteran's left ankle Achilles tendon tear disability is shown to be manifested by marked limited motion of the ankle, warranting a 20 percent rating.

The Veteran withdrew his appeals for service connection for bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, and a left ankle disability. The appeal of these three issues is dismissed.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's diagnosed bilateral knee, left ankle, and right shoulder disabilities are service-connected.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection and individual unemployability due to his service-connected disabilities. The combined rating was found insufficient to meet the criteria for a total disability evaluation based on individual unemployability.

The Veteran withdrew their appeal before a decision was made.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for additional development due to inadequate opinions regarding service connection and potential aggravation of his conditions.

The Veteran's service-connected right ankle and knee disabilities do not render him unemployable, as he is capable of sedentary employment.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities do not render him unable to secure or follow substantially gainful employment, consistent with his education and work experience.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings were denied as the evidence did not show that his conditions warranted a higher rating under VA regulations.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings for post-operative right knee and ankle disabilities were denied by the Board. The evidence did not meet the criteria for a higher rating under the applicable diagnostic codes.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's right ankle disability warrants an initial rating of 20 percent, but no higher, for the entire initial rating period on appeal.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have a current right or left ankle disability, and there is no evidence to support a finding of service connection for these disabilities. The same applies to his right and left lower extremity disabilities, including peripheral neuropathy.

The Veteran's right knee osteoarthritis is found to be proximately due to her service-connected left ankle disability, and thus granted secondary service connection.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining VA treatment records and scheduling a VA examination to assess the severity of his service-connected PTSD.

The Board finds that the evidence is at least in equipoise such that, when resolving reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, service connection for a left ankle disability is warranted.

The March 1959 rating decision denied service connection for right ankle disability. New evidence submitted since then includes the Veteran's STRs from his second tour of active duty and post-service VA treatment records, which may relate to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claim.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining an addendum opinion from a physician to address the etiology of the Veteran's left ankle disability and osteoarthritis. The claim will be adjudicated again based on the new evidence.