Other conditions decisions — 2010

The Veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses incurred on June 16, 2006 was denied because a VA facility was feasibly available and it would have been reasonable for the Veteran to attempt to use it beforehand.

The Veteran's epidermophytosis and onychomycosis are productive of constant itching, but do not meet the criteria for a higher rating. The Veteran meets the schedular criteria for TDIU due to his service-connected disabilities.

The Veteran is seeking service connection for joint and bone pain, which he claims began in service. The Board has ordered a remand to determine the nature and likely etiology of his claimed condition.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for her service personnel records, which are necessary to determine the cause of her discharge from military service. The case will be readjudicated after these records are obtained.

The Board found that the Veteran's actinic keratosis was not incurred in active service and is not due to herbicide exposure. As a result, the claim for service connection was denied.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to substantiate the Veteran's claims for service connection, including obtaining unit histories and stressor verification. The Veteran will be scheduled for examinations to determine the nature of any hand or foot disabilities and a psychiatric examination to determine the etiology of any identified acquired psychiatric disorder.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for a VA examination to assess the current severity of his central serous chorioretinopathy, which may affect his visual acuity and employment.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining service personnel records and private treatment records related to his ulcerative colitis. He must also be afforded a VA examination to determine the etiology of his ulcerative colitis.

The Veteran's obesity claim has been denied as there is no evidence that it is related to his service-connected nasal fracture. The breathing problems and snoring claims are pending due to the need for clarification on whether these are separate disabilities or symptoms of a disability.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for further development, including VA examinations to determine the nature and likely etiology of his claimed residuals from a head injury, neck injury, and bilateral hearing loss. The claims will be reconsidered after all necessary steps are taken.

The Board found no evidence of a current amelanotic nevus during service or within one year of service, and there is no competent evidence linking the Veteran's current condition to his military service. As such, the claim for service connection was denied.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for stiffness of multiple joints and central retinal vein occlusion of the right eye, claimed as a stroke in both eyes, secondary to service-connected anisocoria and opacities of the right eye were denied.

The Board has determined that the appellant's emergency medical treatment at private hospitals was for a condition of such severity that delay in seeking care would have been hazardous to his health. As such, reimbursement is granted under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1725.

The Board has found new and material evidence to reopen the claim for service connection for McArdle's syndrome, which is now pending. The Veteran contends that his pre-existing McArdle's syndrome was aggravated by military service.

The Board finds that the appellant's countable income is not a bar to VA death pension benefits as of June 1, 2006.

The Board found that there was not clear and convincing evidence to establish a common law marriage between the appellant and the Veteran, thus denying her claim for VA benefits as the surviving spouse of the Veteran.

The Board has determined that the appellant does not have an adjudicated service-connected disability for which he was discharged from service, and therefore is not entitled to VA pension benefits.

The Veteran seeks a higher evaluation for his service-connected epididymitis, which was granted in 1977. The Board finds that additional VA medical records are needed to determine the current severity of his condition.

The Veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of medical expenses incurred at Gilmore Memorial Hospital on February 3, 2008 is granted as the treatment was provided in an emergency situation and no VA facilities were feasibly available.

The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for his gunshot wound to the thoracic spine remains pending and is being remanded due to a scheduling issue.