Other conditions decisions — 2017

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete facts in determining whether or not the Veteran's diabetes caused his kidney disease. A new examination is required as the April 2013 examiner relied on incomplete facts.

The Board found that the cause of the Veteran's death, pancreatic cancer, was not attributable to service or exposure to chemical products. The preponderance of evidence did not support a finding that any service-connected conditions contributed to his death.

The Veteran's residuals of a shrapnel wound to the back resulted in no identifiable muscle impairment or scar, and thus do not meet the criteria for a compensable disability rating.

The Board has found that the Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of vision problems other than vitreal floaters and refractive error. Therefore, service connection for these conditions is denied.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development and adjudication, including a VA examination to clarify the severity of his service-connected gout.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for a dental disorder (other than tooth number 9) for compensation purposes is denied as there are no compensable disabilities.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for increased evaluation for deep vein thrombosis and did not address her TDIU claim as it was part of a larger appeal.

The Board has ordered a new VA examination to assess the current severity of the Veteran's PVD of his lower extremities, as the last examination is over three years old and subsequent evidence shows that the condition may have increased in severity. Additionally, an effort needs to be made to obtain Social Security Administration (SSA) records which may contain relevant medical information.

The Veteran's claim for nonservice-connected pension was denied as he did not have qualifying wartime service, and basic eligibility for such benefits is not established.

The appellant is not eligible for DEA benefits as the Veteran did not have a service-connected disability at the time of his death and died without having established service connection for any cause.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's remaining diagnosed eye disorders (presbyopia, myopia and astigmatism) are not service-connected as they are types of refractive error or congenital or developmental defects.

The Board has determined that the appellant's discharge from service was under dishonorable conditions due to multiple periods of AWOL, and thus is a bar to VA benefits.

The Board has determined that the appellant did not meet the legal requirements for obtaining a one-time payment from the FVEC Fund, and therefore her claim is denied.

The Board has decided that the Veteran's case requires further development and remands to the AOJ for additional actions.

The Board found that the Veteran's avascular necrosis of the right hip was not caused by carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment or similar instance of fault due to VA treatment. The additional disability is considered a foreseeable outcome of the initial surgery.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for a bilateral eye disability was denied as the condition is due to refractive error of the eyes and not related to an in-service injury or illness. The Board found that secondary service connection is also not warranted.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current cardiac disabilities, including a heart murmur, are not related to his service and have denied his claim for service connection.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an initial compensable rating for HSV, finding that his service-connected HSV has been manifested with fever blisters or lesions covering less than five percent of his body surface area and asymptomatic scars measuring less than 144 square inches.

The Board has remanded the case due to several issues, including unavailability of service treatment records and need for a new VA examination regarding the etiology of the Veteran's lupus. The appeal is now pending again with instructions for further action.

The Board dismissed the appeal due to the death of the appellant, and no jurisdiction remains for the merits of the case.