Other conditions decisions — 2010

The Veteran's improved pension benefits were retroactively terminated by the RO, effective January 2009. The case is being remanded for further action.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current bilateral foot disorder is related to his service, and thus grants the claim for service connection.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for anemia, a compensable rating for his left wrist scar, and increased ratings for PTSD. The claim for TDIU was also denied.

The Veteran's mental disability was not incurred during service and is not related to his military service. The Board finds no evidence of a chronic condition in service or for many years thereafter.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's currently-diagnosed gastrointestinal disorders were diagnosed many years after service and have not been related to service. As a result, the claim for service connection is denied.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for fatigue, rash, muscle pain, gastrointestinal disorder, and weight loss due to an undiagnosed illness. The evidence did not show these conditions were incurred in or aggravated by service.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current left knee disability, including status post left anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with residual laxity, is related to his military service and grants his claim for service connection.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims of entitlement to service connection for a right hand disorder and a neck disorder, finding that there was no evidence showing these conditions were incurred during active service or related to any in-service disease or injury.

The Veteran's unauthorized medical expenses incurred at WMHS Braddock Hospital were denied as VA facilities were feasibly available and an attempt to use them beforehand would not have been considered reasonable by a prudent layperson.

The Board found no evidence of a nexus between the Veteran's in-service testicular injury and his current testicle disability, thus denying service connection.

The Board found that the Veteran does not have a current lymphatic disorder and did not suffer from one during service. The evidence also showed no connection between his exposure to ionizing radiation and any current condition. As such, the claim for service connection was denied.

The Board determined that the Veteran's arthritis of both hands was not incurred or aggravated by his military service and denied his claims.

The Veteran's claim for a compensable rating for conjunctivitis has been dismissed due to the death of the appellant.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's interstitial cystitis is not attributable to his period of military service and therefore denied the claim for service connection.

The Veteran's service connection claim for cephalgia is granted. The Board finds that the Veteran experienced chronic headaches in service and continues to experience them post-service, meeting the criteria for direct service connection.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's right hip disorder was not incurred in or aggravated by his service, may not be presumed to have been incurred in service, and is not proximately due to, the result of, or aggravated by a service-connected disability.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for penile nerve damage and a bilateral leg disability, finding that there was no evidence of such conditions during service or that they were related to service. The claim for an unstable sternum rating is remanded.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded for additional development, including obtaining inpatient treatment records and scheduling a VA examination to determine the etiology of his right great toe disability.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence and a need for further examination. The appellant's claim will be reconsidered after obtaining additional medical records, determining exposure history, and providing proper notice.

The Board found that the appellant was not permanently incapable of self-support at the age of 18 due to her cerebral palsy, and thus is not eligible for VA benefits on the basis of helpless child status.