Other conditions decisions — 2005

The veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for additional development, including scheduling a VA examination during an active phase of his service-connected urticaria.

The veteran's loss of sight in the left eye is not considered secondary to service-connected residuals of a left basilar skull fracture. However, VA surgery for cataracts did result in additional visual acuity loss and additional disability of the left upper extremity, both of which are found to be due to carelessness or lack of proper skill on VA's part.

The veteran's sleep disturbance is not considered a service-connected condition. The Board denied the claims for service connection for neuropsychological symptoms and neurological symptoms, both claimed as due to an undiagnosed illness during service in the Gulf War. Service connection was also denied for his low back disorder.

The Board has granted service connection for an ulcer disorder effective from May 1, 1975. The veteran's claim was initially denied in 1970 due to failure to report for a VA examination and the RO determined that his ulcer existed prior to service.

The Board denied the appellant's claims of entitlement to service connection for the cause of the veteran's death and to Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) as there was no evidence linking the veteran's lung cancer to his military service, including exposure to herbicides.

The Board found that new and material evidence had not been submitted to reopen the claim for VA benefits based on the character of service, as the February 1987 RO decision is final.

The veteran is seeking service connection for his disability of the hips, characterized as bilateral degenerative joint disease. The Board has decided to remand the case for further development and examination.

The Board found that the veteran's current bilateral foot disorder is not related to his service and denied his claim for service connection.

The Board found no evidence that the veteran's trigeminal neuralgia was caused by VA treatment, and thus denied compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for Alzheimers/dementia as secondary to his service-connected left orbital and zygoma fracture with facial scar and hyperesthesia, finding insufficient evidence to support a link between the conditions.

The Board granted a 10 percent disability rating for the veteran's service-connected neuritis, lower extremities, finding that some of his symptoms are due to the service-connected condition and not solely to diabetes mellitus.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral carpel tunnel syndrome, finding that it did not have its onset during or immediately after service and was not related to his service-connected cervical spine disorder.

The Board has determined that the veteran's lung disorder, other than bronchiectasis, was not incurred in or aggravated by active service and is therefore denied.

The Board denied the appellant's application to reopen his claim for VA benefits, finding that the submitted evidence was not new and material.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim for service connection for loss of the left testicle, but still denies it as there is no evidence linking the condition to active service.

The veteran's claims for service connection and increased rating are being remanded due to the need for further development of evidence.

The Board found that the cause of the veteran's death, metastatic pancreatic cancer, was not related to his military service.

The veteran's appeal is remanded for further development, including obtaining SSA records and scheduling a medical examination to assess the current severity of his service-connected retroperitoneal fibrosis. The claim will also be reconsidered in conjunction with a TDIU claim.

The Board has determined that the veteran's body paralysis associated with a CVA accident is not service-connected, as there was no in-service occurrence or chronic disease manifestation within one year of discharge. The evidence does not support a finding of a nexus between the current condition and service.

The appellant's claim for basic eligibility for VA educational assistance under Chapter 30 was denied as he did not contribute to the prior educational assistance program (VEAP) and therefore is not eligible.