Other conditions decisions — 2021

The Board has granted service connection for spinal stenosis and transverse myelitis, finding that these conditions are related to the Veteran's military service.

The Board denied service connection for hallux valgus of the right foot as there was no evidence linking it to service, and the Veteran's account of symptoms during service is not credible.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete development and need for a VA examination to determine if the Veteran's perforated tympanic membrane residuals are related to his military service.

The Veteran's pension benefits were increased to $365 per month from February 1, 2011 to November 30, 2011.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient rationale in the VA medical opinion and failure to address lay evidence regarding the onset of the Veteran's ulcerative colitis during service.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to the need for a VA examination, as the appellant did not attend the previous one and her claim may have been withdrawn. The Veteran's death status complicates the process.

The Board has remanded the case due to procedural issues and requests for clarification on whether the Veteran wishes to pursue a TDIU claim for the period prior to May 5, 2014. The case will be returned to the RO for review of all added evidence.

The Board has remanded the case due to uncertainty regarding whether the Veteran's hairy cell leukemia existed prior to his period of active duty from August 2010 to September 2010 and, if so, whether it was aggravated by exposure to jet fuel. The Board also requested additional records from the California Army National Guard and Kaiser Permanente.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for chronic arthritis, finding that there was no evidence of a nexus between his current condition and his military service.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete service records and the need for further development regarding the Veteran's claim of bilateral hammertoe.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient development and requested an addendum medical opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's right knee disability, including whether it is related to his service-connected left knee condition or if there is aggravation.

The Board denied the claim for benefits under 38 U.S.C. § 1805 for a child born with spina bifida, finding that the appellant does not have a form or manifestation of spina bifida other than spina bifida occulta.

The Board dismissed the appeal due to the appellant's request for withdrawal of their appeals.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for an addendum medical opinion regarding the Veteran's granuloma of the lung, which is considered a current disability and may be related to his active duty service.

The Veteran's appeal was dismissed due to their death, and the case is not about service connection.

The Board has decided that the Veteran's claim for service connection for a left foot condition is remanded due to inadequate medical opinions and non-compliance with prior remand directives.

The Board has determined that the AOJ did not substantially comply with its remand instructions and has ordered a new request to DoD to determine if the Veteran's service qualifies as active duty for Chapter 33 educational assistance benefits, specifically considering the expanded/revised definition of active duty under Pub. L. No. 111-377.

The Veteran's hyperkeratosis of the feet is granted as secondary to his service-connected diabetes mellitus. His esophageal condition (Barrett's esophagus) is denied due to lack of evidence linking it to herbicide exposure or diabetes.

The Board dismissed the appeal because the issue was resolved in favor of the Veteran, and there are no allegations of errors for appellate consideration.

The Veteran's claim for additional VA educational assistance benefits under the Post-9/11 GI Bill for a vocational flight training program from January 14, 2012 to July 31, 2012 was denied as he had already used his maximum entitlement of $10,000. The Board found that the Veteran's claim is not supported by applicable law and regulations.