Other conditions decisions — 2014

The Board has determined that additional action is needed to determine the character of appellant's discharge and its impact on VA Loan Guaranty eligibility. The case is being remanded for further development.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for a new VA examination to assess the current severity of his service-connected bilateral shin splints, as his last VA examination did not account for recent testimony indicating worsening symptoms.

The Board has remanded the case for a VA examination to determine if the Veteran's current skin disorder is related to his period of active duty service, including exposure to herbicides. The appeal will be returned after further development.

The Veteran's daughter has established eligibility for nonservice-connected burial benefits as the appellant used her personal funds to pay $4,592.62 toward the funeral expenses for the Veteran.

The Veteran's GSW residuals have been rated at 20 percent since April 8, 1981. The Board found that the current rating adequately reflects his disability.

The Veteran's claim for full disability compensation benefits while incarcerated is denied due to the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 5313 and 38 C.F.R. § 3.665, which deny such benefits.

The Board denied the claim for service connection for the cause of the decedent's death as there was no active military, naval, or air service to consider under 38 C.F.R. § 3.318 and no competent medical evidence linking amyotrophic lateral sclerosis to his military service.

The Veteran's residuals of status post right parietal craniotomy have been rated at 10 percent since December 1, 2006. The Board has determined that the disability does not warrant a higher rating based on the criteria effective prior to October 23, 2008.

The Veteran does not have a current disability of the back, right fifth toe, or dizzy spells.,Throughout the initial rating period on appeal, examination of the right fifth toe was normal with full range of motion and no x-ray evidence of arthritis.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including scheduling VA examinations and obtaining medical opinions regarding the Veteran's claimed conditions.

Service connection was established for bilateral shin splints. Initial compensable ratings were not assigned for cervicitis or HSV II.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development to address the nature and etiology of his claimed normal pressure hydrocephalus, including consideration of service connection based on exposure to blast injuries during active service.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's right eye disability, including amblyopia, esotropia, and strabismus, is service-connected as it was aggravated by his military service.

The Board vacated its February 21, 2013 decision regarding increased disability ratings for the Veteran's Raynaud's syndrome conditions. The motion alleging clear and unmistakable error is dismissed as moot.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claim for additional development due to inadequate medical opinions regarding the etiology of his gastrointestinal disorder. The case is now pending and will be reconsidered after obtaining updated medical records and a new opinion from an examiner.

The Veteran's breast cancer is considered to be incurred in service, as it was related to a benign tumor that she had removed during active duty for training (ACDUTRA). The claim is granted.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for a VA medical opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's bilateral hip disorder and secondary service connection.

The Board denied the claim for service connection for the cause of death, finding that there was no evidence linking the Veteran's causes of death to his military service or any presumptive conditions associated with Agent Orange exposure.

The Veteran's fungal infection of the feet is found to have had its onset during active military service, and thus he is granted service connection for this condition.

The Veteran's marriage to the appellant did not meet the eligibility criteria for recognition as an eligible surviving spouse for DIC and death pension benefits due to the timing of their marriage.