Other conditions decisions — 2015

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, including PTSD and a personality disorder, finding insufficient evidence to support such a claim.

The Board has remanded the case for further development due to the Veteran's failure to report to a scheduled VA examination and because of undelivered correspondence. The Veteran will be notified about the date of the rescheduled examination.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's prostate disability and weight disorder were not incurred or aggravated during active service, nor are they proximately due to or aggravated by any service-connected disabilities. The claims for these conditions have been denied.

The Board has remanded the case due to failure to appear at a scheduled hearing and needs to reschedule a videoconference hearing for the Veteran.

The Veteran's service-connected cold injury residuals of the left and right feet have been rated at 20 percent since February 23, 2010. Effective from February 5, 2014, a higher rating of 30 percent has been granted for each foot.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and earlier effective date were granted. He was assigned a 30 percent rating for pseudofolliculitis barbae, effective July 17, 2012.

The Board has remanded the case for further development due to incomplete records and clarification of medical opinions.

The Veteran's skin rash on the left leg and ankle is currently rated at 10 percent, but no higher. The Board finds that a rating of 30 percent is warranted based on the current manifestations.

The Veteran's claim for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) has been granted, and the effective date is not specified.

The Veteran's service-connected post left lower lung lobectomy residuals have not been manifested by malignant neoplasm. Although the Veteran has respiratory impairment and requires oxygen therapy, the preponderance of the competent medical evidence reflects this is due to his COPD and not the service-connected post left lower lung lobectomy residuals.

The Veteran's left wrist disability, specifically a scaphoid fracture, has not met the criteria for an evaluation in excess of 10 percent since March 2007.

The Veteran's arachnoiditis disability is found to be due to carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment or similar instance of fault on the part of VA in furnishing treatment. The Board finds that this event was not reasonably foreseeable and thus compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for arachnoiditis is granted.

The Board found that the Veteran's eye disorders, including bilateral cataracts and physiological anisocoria, were not incurred in service. The preponderance of evidence does not support a finding of service connection for these conditions.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's currently diagnosed alopecia is not related to his service-connected sinusitis or any other in-service event, and thus denied his claim for service connection.

The Veteran's left knee disability was rated at 10 percent prior to September 22, 2008, for degenerative joint disease and instability. The rating is based on the current level of functional impairment without additional compensable symptomatology.

The appellant's countable income from October 1, 2007 to August 31, 2008 exceeded the maximum annual pension rates (MAPRs) applicable during that time period, thus denying her entitlement to nonservice-connected death pension benefits.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's MDS is not related to his service, including as due to herbicide exposure. The claim for service connection for MDS is denied.

The Veteran's HIV-related illness was granted a 30 percent rating from February 15, 2007 through April 6, 2011 and a 10 percent rating beginning April 7, 2011. A 50 percent rating for dysthymic disorder was also granted effective August 5, 2013.

The case is being remanded to schedule the appellant for a Travel Board hearing due to her request and difficulties in securing transportation.

The Board has determined that the appellant and Veteran were in an attempted common law marriage over one year prior to the date of the Veteran's death, and as such, recognition as the Veteran's surviving spouse for purposes of VA benefits is granted.