Other conditions decisions — 2017

The Board has determined that the Veteran's service-connected squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus, which was aggravated by his exposure to Agent Orange during military service, is the cause of his death. As a result, the claim for service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death is granted.

The Board is remanding the case to verify the Veteran's periods of active duty for training and inactive duty for training, as well as obtain his VA treatment records. The appellant must provide evidence that he was exposed to toxic chemicals while serving at Andersen Air Force Base in Guam.

The Veteran's left nephrectomy is not manifested by impairment to the right kidney, and his symptoms do not warrant a higher rating. The Board finds that he does not meet the criteria for a higher than 30 percent rating.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including scheduling a videoconference hearing.

The Board found that the Veteran's infection following his right total hip arthroplasty was not caused by VA negligence or carelessness, and thus denied compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151.

The Veteran's arachnoiditis and associated radiculopathy in both legs have been rated based on their severity, with the right leg receiving a higher rating due to more severe symptoms.

The Veteran's left leg varicose veins are currently rated at 10 percent, effective September 4, 2012. The evidence does not support a higher rating as the condition is relieved by elevation and compression hosiery.

The Veteran's initial claim for a higher rating for posterior tibialis dysfunction of the left ankle was granted, and she is currently receiving a 20 percent disability rating.,An effective date earlier than January 1, 2012 for an initial disability rating of 30 percent for posterior tibialis dysfunction of the right ankle has not been established.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development due to incomplete records and further review of the claim.

The Veteran's overpayment of VA compensation benefits was created due to his failure to notify VA of his return to active duty, and the Board finds that he is at fault in its creation. The decision concludes that recovery would not result in undue hardship for the Veteran.

The Veteran's amyloidosis of the lung is at least as likely as not due to in-service asbestos exposure, and service connection for this condition is granted.

The Veteran's appeal has been dismissed due to his death, and no jurisdiction remains for the Board to consider the merits of the case.

The Board found that the Veteran's current bilateral blepharitis/conjunctiva, and his other bilateral eye disabilities of cataracts and glaucoma had their onset many years following discharge from service, and are not otherwise related to any disease, injury or other event in service.

The Veteran's left foot hammer toe deformity prior to July 28, 2015 does not meet the criteria for a compensable evaluation. From July 28, 2015, his condition is rated at 20 percent disabling.

The Veteran had a pending claim for non-service connected disability pension benefits at the time of his death, and his income was below the applicable maximum annual pension rate (MAPR) during the relevant period.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current diagnoses of endometriosis and uterine fibroids are related to her active service, warranting a grant of service connection for these conditions.

The Board has found that further development is necessary to obtain the Veteran's employment history prior to March 29, 2013. The case is therefore being remanded for this purpose.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to a change in the severity of his left foot/toe disabilities since the last examination. The case will be returned for further development and readjudication.

The Board denied the appellant's claim as a surviving spouse of the Veteran, finding that her separation from the Veteran was not temporary or due to his misconduct without fault on her part.

The Board has decided to remand the case for additional development, including obtaining all relevant medical records and readjudicating the claim based on the new evidence.