Other conditions decisions — 2008

The VA determined that the veteran's right ring finger disability was not incurred in or aggravated by active military service.

The Board has determined that the veteran's thoracolumbar spine disability does not meet or approximate the criteria for a higher rating prior to October 22, 2005 and from that date forward.

The Board has granted service connection for fatigue due to toxin exposure, but the RO assigned a noncompensable evaluation. The case is now remanded for additional development including obtaining Worker's Compensation records and scheduling an examination.

The veteran seeks service connection for a gastrointestinal disability, including hiatal hernia, peptic ulcer disease, and chronic gastritis. He also seeks an increased rating for his PTSD. The Board has determined that additional development is needed in both cases.

The Board has determined that the veteran's dysthymic disorder warrants a 50% disability rating, effective from the initial grant of service connection.

The Board found that the veteran's pre-existing pulmonary disorder, resulting in bronchiectasis, was not aggravated during service. The evidence did not support a finding of aggravation.

The veteran's left knee disability has been granted service connection and rated at a 10 percent level since the initial grant of service connection, with no higher rating being warranted either prior to or since May 23, 2006.

The Board has determined that the veteran's skin disease of the lower extremities and feet was not incurred in or aggravated by service, including exposure to herbicides. The claim is denied.

The VA denied the veteran's claim for an increased rating for his degenerative joint disease at L4, finding that he did not meet the criteria for a higher rating during the period from February 1, 2004 to December 1, 2007.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate notice provided to the appellant regarding her DIC benefits claim.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have arthritis of the bilateral hands and therefore, service connection cannot be granted.

The Board has ordered a remand due to perceived deficiencies in the analysis and for compliance with the statutory duty to notify. The appellant is not entitled to benefits as a matter of law, but should have been given an opportunity to show he had established qualifying service.

The veteran is seeking compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for nerve damage to his left hand and leg resulting from treatment provided by the VA, specifically an aortogram performed on March 24, 2005. The case has been remanded due to missing records and the need for further examination.

The veteran's appeal for an annual clothing allowance was dismissed due to his death.

The Board has determined that the veteran's death was caused by VA's failure to exercise the degree of care expected from a reasonable healthcare provider, specifically in not conducting routine surveillance for hepatocellular carcinoma. As a result, DIC benefits are granted.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have a currently diagnosed bladder condition and therefore cannot establish service connection for it on any basis.

The Board has granted service connection for residuals of a compression fracture of the thoracic spine and assigned a separate 10 percent evaluation for tinnitus. The issues regarding increased evaluations for hearing loss, vestibular lesion, and tinnitus are left pending.

The veteran's need for a higher level of care due to his service-connected systemic pulmonary histoplasmosis with severe pulmonary involvement and blindness has been established, warranting special monthly compensation at the higher aid and attendance rate.

The veteran's application for enrollment in the VA healthcare system was denied due to his assignment to priority category 8 and the filing of his application after January 17, 2003.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral ear disability and respiratory disability, finding that there is no evidence of a current disability or in-service incurrence. The claim to reopen his defective vision due to refractive error was also denied as new and material evidence did not raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim.