Other conditions decisions — 2006

The veteran's death was not caused by a service-connected disability, and he did not meet the criteria for DIC under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1318.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for a skin disorder of his feet and osteomyelitis of his feet, finding that there was no evidence linking these conditions to service or any presumptive exposure to Agent Orange. The Board also found insufficient medical nexus evidence connecting the current disorders to service.

The veteran's statements regarding his current state of health raise the issue of entitlement to Priority Group 4 health benefits. The AOJ should review these statements and adjudicate this issue.

The Board has remanded the case due to an intertwined service connection issue for left tubal ectopic pregnancy, status-post left salpingectomy. The initial rating claim for right salpingo-oophorectomy is also being considered.

The veteran's cause of death is being reviewed, and additional medical records from Dr. Ancheta are needed to determine if service connection for the cause of death should be granted.

The Board has determined that the veteran's hallux valgus of both feet, with residuals from bunionectomies, does not warrant a compensable rating under VA disability evaluation criteria.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including verification of service and obtaining VA and SSA records. If Vietnam service is verified, a VA oncological examination will be arranged to determine if the veteran's adenocarcinoma of the cecum is related to Agent Orange exposure.

The veteran's service medical records show elevated white blood cell counts but no current diagnosis of a blood disorder. The Board finds that there is no proof of a present disability and denies the claim.

The Board has determined that the veteran's peripheral vascular disease is not related to service or a service-connected disability and therefore denied his claim.

The Board found that new and material evidence had not been submitted to reopen the veteran's claim of service connection for bilateral foot disorder, as no injury or disease was documented in service records.

The veteran's claim for an increased rating for his left foot disability, which is currently rated as 10 percent disabling, has been denied. The Board found that the evidence does not support a higher evaluation due to no more than moderate functional impairment.

The Board denied service connection for residuals of a back injury and residuals of a left arm injury. It also denied an initial increased rating for asbestosis prior to July 19, 2004, but granted a 10% rating effective since that date.

The Board has denied the veteran's request to reopen his claim for service connection for AE with defective vision, finding that new and material evidence was not received sufficient to substantiate the claim.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection due to lack of evidence linking his current gastrointestinal and bilateral clavicle disorders to military service.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for basic eligibility for VA death benefits because her deceased husband did not have qualifying military service.

The VA has determined that the veteran's service-connected left hip and buttocks disability, which is a gunshot wound, does not warrant an evaluation in excess of 20 percent.

The veteran's service-connected chondromalacia of the right knee was granted an initial evaluation of 10 percent effective August 21, 1976. The RO denied a higher rating for his left knee and increased his right knee disability to 10 percent after June 7, 2001.

The Board found that the veteran does not have a current sleep disorder and therefore denied service connection for insomnia.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for additional medical opinions and evidence. The issues include service connection for joint problems, muscle weakness, decreased facial sensation, and headaches.

The Board found that the veteran's spondylolisthesis at L5 to S1 does not meet or approximate the criteria for a higher evaluation, and thus denied his claim for an increased rating.