Other conditions decisions — 2019

The Veteran withdrew his appeal regarding the increased disability rating for his service-connected peripheral vascular disease of the right lower extremity, effective from September 1, 2018.

The Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 is remanded due to the inadequacy of the January 2015 VA examination, and a new examination is needed to determine if the Veteran has an additional disability that is directly related to his May 1970 VA treatment with hydrochloric acid.

The appeal was dismissed due to the death of the appellant.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities render him in need of regular aid and attendance, leading to the grant of SMC based on this need.

The Veteran's increased rating claim for bilateral exudative age-related macular degeneration is being remanded due to an inadequate VA examination. The examiner did not provide the required second recording of corrected distance vision, which could affect the severity assessment.

The Board has granted service connection for residuals of a coccyx fracture and remanded the TDIU claim.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical evidence addressing whether the Veteran's left foot bunions were aggravated by service. The Veteran needs an addendum opinion from VA.

The Board has decided that the Veteran's dental decay, claimed as secondary to a psychiatric disability, should be remanded for further action due to insufficient rationale in the prior medical opinion and the need to obtain additional private treatment records.

The Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 due to swelling of the brain is denied as there is no indication that VA treatment caused this condition.

The Veteran's initial claim for a higher rating for other specified trauma disorder is granted, with an effective date of January 20, 2015. The evidence shows occupational and social impairment but no total occupational and social impairment.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the etiology of the Veteran's eye disabilities, specifically whether they are related to service exposure. The VA examiner is requested to provide an addendum opinion addressing these issues.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's death was due to an event not reasonably foreseeable, specifically a blood stream infection in his debilitated condition. As such, compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for the cause of the Veteran's death is granted.

The Board has remanded the service connection claims for gout and an eye disability due to insufficient opinions from VA examiners. The Veteran's gout is being reviewed again to determine if it existed prior to his military service or was aggravated by service, while the eye disability claim requires a determination on whether it manifested during service or is related to hypertension.

The Veteran's eustachian tube dysfunction is rated at a 30 percent disability rating, the maximum available under Diagnostic Code 6204.

The Veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of unauthorized non-VA medical services provided from January 8, 2013 through January 18, 2013 is being remanded due to the need to obtain VA treatment records and clarify the services received by the Veteran within the 24-month period prior to January 8, 2013.

The Board denied service connection for Barrett’s esophagus, finding that the evidence does not support a link between the condition and service, including exposure to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune.

The Board found that the adjustment of VA compensation benefits due to receipt of training pay for 25 drill and training sessions during FY 2013 was proper, thus denying the appeal.

The Board has remanded the case for further development due to outstanding treatment records. The Veteran's right eye pterygium disability remains rated at 10 percent, effective October 26, 2012.

The Board has remanded the issue of service connection for a heart disability due to an addendum opinion on whether it is related to herbicide agent exposure in service.

The Veteran's daughter, who turned 18 in August [Redacted], 2017, is not eligible for continued CHAMPVA benefits as she has not pursued an approved full-time course of education or training and does not meet the criteria for being permanently incapable of self-support before age 18.