Other conditions decisions — 2004

The competent and probative medical evidence does not support a finding that the veteran's cramps and numbness of the feet and thighs were incurred in or aggravated by service.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete examination reports and further development is needed before a decision can be made.

The veteran has been granted service connection for facial scars due to shell fragment wounds incurred in active service. However, there is no current disability resulting from a shell fragment wound of the left arm.

The Board has denied the veteran's petition to reopen her claim for service connection for varicose veins, right leg on a direct basis due to lack of new and material evidence.

The Board denied the appellant's request to reopen her claim for nonservice-connected death pension, finding that she did not submit new and material evidence. The veteran served with the Philippine Scouts but was determined ineligible for benefits due to his service status.

The veteran's PTSD is manifested by symptoms such as anxiety, intrusive thoughts and flashbacks, sleep difficulty including nightmares, isolation, irritability, aggression, and impaired communication resulting in total occupational and social impairment. The Board has found that the criteria for a 100 percent rating for PTSD have been approximated.

The Board denied the claim for service connection for colon cancer, finding that it was not incurred during active duty or due to exposure to herbicides. The appellant's post-service medical records showed a diagnosis of rectal cancer in September 1991, but there is no evidence linking this condition to his military service.

The veteran's appeal is remanded for additional development, including a new VA examination and obtaining relevant medical records.

The Board found that the veteran's claim for an increased evaluation and earlier effective date for residuals of a shrapnel wound to the left buttock was denied. The preponderance of evidence did not support granting either benefit.

The veteran's appeal for education benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill is being remanded due to a need for a hearing before a Veterans Law Judge.

The Board denied an earlier effective date for service connection for the cause of the veteran's death, finding that no claim was filed prior to September 14, 1998.

The Board has ordered a new VA examination of the veteran's skin to determine if his current skin disorder is related to service, including exposure to Japanese encephalitis vaccine or undiagnosed illness. The claim will be remanded for this purpose.

The Board has restored the veteran's 10 percent evaluation for his service-connected left inguinal hernia effective from May 1, 2000.

The Board has remanded the case to the RO for additional development and notice, including obtaining VA medical records from Miami and Augusta, as well as Social Security Administration (SSA) disability determination records.

The veteran's claim was granted and his effective date for the resumption of compensation after release from incarceration is set at August 25, 2000.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim for service connection for post traumatic stress disorder due to new and material evidence submitted since the last denial. The claim is then considered on its merits, with no current rating assigned as the issue was not about a disability evaluation.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral blindness and an increased rating for his left fourth metacarpal fracture. The decision also noted that no new and material evidence had been presented to reopen the claim of service connection for bilateral blindness.

The VA determined that the veteran's chronic pelvic pain disorder, which resolved after surgery, did not warrant a rating in excess of 10 percent.

The case is being remanded for additional development, including a VA neuro-ophthalmology examination to determine the nature and etiology of any left eye disorder present.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for PUD and also denied his claim for aid and attendance allowance due to lack of evidence supporting these claims.