Other conditions decisions — 2011

The Board found no evidence linking the cause of death (acute leukemia and myelodysplasia) to service-connected conditions, thus denying the claim for service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death.

The Board found no evidence of a chronic lung condition during service, and the Veteran's current bronchogenic carcinoma is not shown to be related to his in-service asbestos exposure. The claim for service connection was denied.

The Board has granted a rating of 30 percent for the Veteran's residuals of a fragment wound to the right side of the neck effective from May 18, 2006, through February 26, 2007. The Veteran also received a separate compensable disability rating for associated scarring.

The Veteran's appeal has been dismissed due to his death, and the Board does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of this claim.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's epidermophytosis and onychomycosis do not meet or approximate the criteria for a disability rating in excess of 10 percent, as they do not involve more than 5% of his entire body or exposed areas affected.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's right and left hand disabilities are not related to his service-connected cervical spine disability, and thus denied these claims.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's service-connected amebiasis and left testicle varicocele do not warrant higher initial evaluations.

The Board has remanded the case to the RO for further development and readjudication, specifically using the applicable statute and regulations in effect prior to October 1, 1997. The appellant's claim of entitlement to compensation under the provisions of 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for the Veteran's cause of death will be reconsidered.

The Board found clear and unmistakable evidence that the pinched nerve in the Veteran's neck was pre-existing and not aggravated by service.

The Board found that the Veteran's hip disorders were not incurred in or aggravated by service and denied his claims.

The Board found that the Veteran's current eye disabilities are not proximately due to or aggravated by his service-connected diabetes mellitus, type II.

The Board denied service connection for mitral regurgitation and atrial fibrillation (with pacemaker) disorders as due to Agent Orange exposure, finding no evidence of a positive association between herbicide exposure and these conditions. The claim was also not granted based on secondary service connection to PTSD.

The Board found that the Veteran's current skin condition had its onset during his military service and is related to his active duty, granting service connection for a skin disorder.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's service connection for dental disability, including for VA treatment purposes, is granted due to service trauma during active duty.

The Board found that the evidence did not support an evaluation in excess of 10 percent for a left post-operative bunionectomy, as the condition was evaluated under DC 5280, which addresses unilateral hallux valgus and does not allow for higher ratings.

The Board found that the Appellant's carpal tunnel syndrome was not incurred or aggravated in service and denied his claim for service connection.

The Board found that the Veteran's claimed residuals of a head injury were not incurred in or aggravated by service, nor may they be presumed to have been incurred in or aggravated by service. The evidence received since the September 2002 rating decision does not raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim for chronic residuals, contusion, right eye.

The Board has determined that the Veteran is not competent for VA benefits purposes.

The Veteran's ADEM is not service-connected due to lack of a causal relationship with the influenza vaccination received at VA. The malaria residuals do not meet criteria for a compensable evaluation.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to properly adjudicate the Veteran's claim for service connection for cause of death, including consideration of herbicide exposure and ionizing radiation exposure. The case is REMANDED for further development.