Other conditions decisions — 2021

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence and failure to verify herbicide agent exposure. The Veteran's skin disorder claim is being returned for further development, including a new VA examination and verification of his service in Thailand.

The Board has decided to remand the Veteran's claims for a compensable disability rating and higher than 20 percent rating for his umbilical herniorrhaphy due to recent treatment records indicating worsening of his condition.

The Board has granted a higher initial 20 percent rating for the Veteran's service-connected right and left thumb disabilities, effective from January 14, 2013.

The appeal was dismissed due to the appellant's death, and no service connection issues were decided.

The appeal was dismissed due to the appellant's death, and no jurisdiction remains for further action.

The Veteran's disability rating for unspecified trauma and stressor related disorder was denied as his symptoms did not meet the criteria for a higher rating, with the exception of the period from January 8, 2020 when he received a 50% rating.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for neurotoxic vestibulopathy and/or limbic encephalopathy, claimed as neurological effects of mefloquine (an anti-malarial medication), was denied. The Veteran also had his TBI with residual concussion rated at 10 percent, which he appealed. However, the Board found no current diagnosis of these conditions and thus denied both claims.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection for loss of sensation in his left upper and lower extremities due to inadequate examinations and consideration of all relevant evidence.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for right and left foot dyshidrosis, to include as due to herbicide exposure, are remanded. A new VA examination is needed to determine the nature and cause of any diagnosed bilateral foot disability.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal regarding the timeliness of a VA Form 9 substantive appeal received on October 27, 2015.

The Board has remanded the case due to outstanding VA treatment records and incomplete income information provided by the Veteran.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for squamous cell carcinoma, finding that there was no evidence of a current disability and that it did not manifest during service. The Board also noted that the Veteran had been exposed to herbicide agents but this exposure does not constitute an in-service incurrence.

The Board has remanded the case due to a need for additional evidentiary development regarding the appellant's deceased spouse's World War II service and its impact on her application for VA death benefits.

The Board has remanded the claims for service connection for glioblastoma multiforme and the cause of death due to concerns about exposure to burn pit toxins during military service.

The Veteran's appeal for a higher disability evaluation for his service-connected Other Trauma and Stressor Related Disorder since July 18, 2019 is denied. The claim for TDIU prior to July 18, 2019 remains pending.

The Board found that the Veteran's ear disability manifested by hearing impairment and dizziness was not caused by or related to active service, and denied his claims.

The Board has found that E.J.P. is entitled to death benefits as the surviving spouse, but L.U.-P. appealed this decision and it was remanded due to procedural issues.

The Veteran's Sjogren's syndrome, vitreous degeneration, and punctate keratitis are being remanded due to the need for verification of service in Southwest Asia during the Persian Gulf War. The Board will seek an addendum opinion from a VA examiner regarding the etiology of his Sjogren's syndrome.

The Veteran's service-connected right and left foot stress fracture residuals are currently rated as 20 percent disabling each. The Board has determined that a higher rating is warranted, but remands are needed to obtain updated treatment records and determine the severity of these disabilities throughout the appeal period.

The Veteran's service did not meet the minimum active duty requirement for VA home loan guaranty benefits, as he was discharged due to fraudulent enlistment and not a service-connected disability.