Other conditions decisions — 2011

The Veteran does not have a currently diagnosed respiratory disorder that is related to his military service, including as due to an undiagnosed illness or secondary to a service-connected heart disability.

The Veteran does not have any residuals of brain syndrome, and therefore the criteria for a compensable rating are not met.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's left epididymitis does not warrant an initial compensable rating, as there is no evidence of penial deformity or atrophy. The disability is rated as non-compensable.

The Veteran's Raynaud's syndrome was previously rated at 10 percent and the Board has determined that a higher rating of 20 percent is warranted due to characteristic attacks occurring four to six times a week.

The appellant withdrew his appeal regarding the effective date for a 10 percent disability evaluation for shrapnel wound of the left arm.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for a VA examination, submission of additional evidence, and obtaining records from the State of Florida.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for a VA examination to determine the current severity of his service-connected residuals of a fracture of the left humerus. The case will be re-adjudicated after the examination.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining VA treatment records and scheduling a C&P examination to assess the severity of the Veteran's service-connected residuals of a stress fracture of the left heel.

The Veteran died of respiratory failure caused by pharyngeal cancer or a soft tissue sarcoma that was related to his exposure to Agent Orange. The appeal is remanded for further development, including obtaining VA medical records and an opinion on the cause of death.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been received to reopen the claim of entitlement to service connection for a left eye disorder. The Veteran's current left eye disorder is found to be etiologically related to his military service, and thus service connection is granted.

The Board found that there is no evidence of TTP in service and no competent medical evidence linking the Veteran's current TTP to his military service. The acquired psychiatric disorder claim was also denied as there is no evidence of a psychiatric disorder during service or within one year after service, and no competent medical evidence linking the current condition to service.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded for additional development, including obtaining Social Security Administration records and arranging for a VA examination to assess her employability due to service-connected disabilities.

The Board dismissed the appeal due to the Veteran's death, and thus no jurisdiction remains for adjudicating the merits of the claim.

The Board finds that the Veteran's eye disorders, diagnosed as central serous retinopathy and pigment epithelial detachment, are secondary to his service-connected PTSD. The evidence is in relative equipoise as to whether the Veteran's PTSD has aggravated these conditions.

The Veteran's service-connected hallux valgus of the left and right feet are currently evaluated at 10 percent, which is the maximum schedular rating available under Diagnostic Code 5280. The Board finds that a higher evaluation is not warranted.

The Veteran's residuals of myocardial infarction status post percutaneous coronary intervention have been rated at 60 percent disabling as of July 21, 2010.

The Board found that the Veteran's injuries were not caused by or the result of VA medical treatment, and denied compensation for his claimed conditions.

The Board has remanded the case for further development and consideration, including determining the appellant's status as a stepchild of the Veteran for VA education benefits and the applicable eligibility date for DEA benefits. The effective date for DEA eligibility will be determined based on the confusing and contradictory dates in the record.

The Board denied service connection for chronic Barrett's esophagus claimed as the result of asbestos exposure, finding that there is no indication of such condition during or after service and no evidence linking it to service.

The Board has determined that the appellant is not entitled to recognition as the surviving spouse of the Veteran for purposes of VA death benefits due to their separation, which was not due to the misconduct or procurement by the Veteran without fault of the appellant.