Other conditions decisions — 2008

The Board has determined that the veteran's current lumbar spine disorder is not related to service, specifically the in-service fracture of L2-3 and L3-4. The claim for service connection is denied.

The veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 is being remanded due to the need for a further examination and opinion regarding informed consent, as well as consideration of VA regulations on informed consent.

The Board has determined that the veteran's dental trauma is not due to a shell fragment wound in service, and therefore denied his claim for service connection.

The VA determined that the veteran's service-connected chronic urticaria did not warrant a rating in excess of 10 percent, as it did not meet the criteria for higher ratings based on severity or frequency.

The Board has determined that the veteran's squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue is as likely as not related to his exposure to Agent Orange during service, and grants service connection for this condition.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have a current hiatal hernia or severe reflux disease disability and therefore, service connection for these conditions is denied. Additionally, the temporary total rating based on need for convalescence following surgery for a hiatal hernia is also denied.

The Board found that the veteran's multiple strokes were not incurred during active military service and did not meet the criteria for presumptive service connection due to exposure to hazardous chemicals or toxins. The evidence does not support a finding of service connection based on direct service connection.

The Board found no current heart murmur disability and denied the veteran's claim for service connection.

The veteran's initial evaluations for left testicular pain and residual scar from inguinal hernia repair are both at the maximum allowable under VA rating criteria. No higher ratings can be assigned.

The Board found no evidence of a current bilateral foot disorder related to service or any service-connected disability, and thus denied the veteran's claim for service connection.

The Board has determined that the appellant is not eligible for DIC benefits as the veteran's surviving spouse due to her marriage occurring after the expiration of 15 years from the termination of his service.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for a rating in excess of 10 percent for dermatomyositis, finding that the evidence did not meet the criteria for a higher rating as there was no systemic therapy required and only four percent of his skin was affected.

The Board denied the veteran's request to reopen his claim for service connection for eye disability attributable to sulfanilamide use during service, finding no new and material evidence.

The Board found that the veteran's aortic stenosis existed prior to service and was not aggravated by active service, thus denying his claim for service connection.

The Board denied an earlier effective date for the grant of DIC benefits, finding that the proper effective date is July 14, 1978. The appellant's claim to reopen her DIC benefits was not submitted until after this date.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral Achilles tendon tendinitis, finding that there was no evidence linking his current condition to his military service.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to address the veteran's claims for service connection, including obtaining medical records and scheduling examinations.

The Board found that the grant of service connection for peripheral vascular disease of the bilateral lower extremities and abdominal aortic aneurysm was clear and unmistakable error, and thus severed service connection.

The veteran's disabilities do not render him unable to care for his daily needs without the assistance of another person, and he does not require regular aid and attendance or housebound status.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for service connection for the cause of death and remanded her claims for nonservice-connected death pension benefits. The case is now being returned to the RO for further action.