Other conditions decisions — 2017

The Veteran's skin disability was not found to meet the criteria for an extraschedular rating. The Board denied service connection for a bilateral knee disorder and a bilateral ankle disorder, finding that there is no evidence of such disabilities being related to his active duty service or any other etiology.

The Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 was denied as the additional disability (hallux abducto valgus of the right foot, partial right side paralysis, and memory loss) is not considered to be caused by VA medical care.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for increased evaluations for his left eye corneal abrasion and TDIU, finding that during the appeal period from July 31, 2005 to January 16, 2006, the disability was manifested by corrected distant vision of 20/20 in each eye without active pathology. From January 17, 2006 to the present day, the disability was manifested by episodic symptoms including eye pain and corrected distant vision of 20/40 or better in each eye. The Board also found that for the appeal period from July 31, 2005, the Veteran's service-connected disabilities did not prohibit him from securing and maintaining substantially gainful employment.

The Board has remanded the case to the AOJ due to an inadequate VA medical opinion regarding the Veteran's gastrointestinal disability. The claim will be reconsidered based on new evidence.

The Board found that the Veteran's right knee disabilities, including chondromalacia and degenerative joint disease (DJD), did not begin during his military service or within a year of separation. The evidence does not support a finding that these conditions were caused by or aggravated by his service-connected left knee disability.

The Veteran suffered a stroke during carotid artery surgery provided by VA. The Board found that the stroke was not caused by carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment, or similar instance of fault on the part of VA in furnishing the care, treatment, or examination; or an event not reasonably foreseeable.

The Veteran's esophagitis and esophageal dysmotility with chronic cough were found to be less than considerable in severity, thus not meeting the criteria for a higher rating. The claim was denied.

The Veteran is granted reimbursement for the cost of Texas journeyman electrician certification tests taken on November 7, 2012 and March 29, 2013. The claim for reimbursement for costs related to an examination preparatory course that was taken on September 8, 2012 is denied.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's diverticulitis is not etiologically related to service, and therefore denied his claim for service connection.

The Board found no evidence linking the cause of the Veteran's death to active service, and thus denied both the claim for service connection for the cause of death and the DIC claim under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1318.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded to obtain a new VA examination and additional medical records, as well as for further development of the claim.

The Board has determined that the appellant did not have service in the United States Armed Forces and therefore is not a veteran for purposes of receiving VA benefits. As such, the claim for basic eligibility for VA benefits is denied.

The Veteran's claims for service connection and increased ratings are being remanded due to the need for further development.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's heart condition, which was present prior to service and is a congenital defect, was aggravated by service. As such, service connection for his bicuspid aortic valve with mild aortic stenosis and aortic insufficiency with secondary left ventricular dilatation and low ejection fraction has been granted.

The Board found that the Veteran's request for a waiver of overpayment was timely and granted half of the debt, amounting to $25,697.

The Board has granted service connection for a left hand disability, presumed to be related to active service. The gastrointestinal disability claim is denied as there is no evidence of current diagnosis or etiology during the appeal period.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including scheduling a VA examination and obtaining clarification on policies regarding examinations of employees or former employees.

The Board found that the Veteran's paruresis did not exist prior to service and was not aggravated by active service, nor is it secondary to service-connected PTSD. The claim for service connection was denied.

The Board has ordered a remand due to the need for an addendum VA opinion regarding whether the Veteran's service-connected left knee disability permanently worsened her left foot metatarsalgia beyond normal progression.

The Veteran is seeking compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. §1151 for left foot disability resulting from a surgical procedure in August 2004 at the VA Medical Center. The Board has determined that additional development and an opinion are needed to address whether the current musculoskeletal impairment of the left foot constitutes additional disability incurred as a result of the surgery.