Other conditions decisions — 2021

The Board has ordered the case to be remanded due to insufficient consideration of recent VA vocational rehabilitation records and a medical opinion indicating the Veteran's condition worsened significantly in 2013-2014.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding whether the Veteran has residuals of a TIA or stroke, and if so, whether these conditions are related to service. The Veteran contends that he had a cerebrovascular accident during service which was treated with aspirin for treatment of his TIA or stroke.

The Board has remanded the issues of service connection for right and left heel spurs and bilateral hernia disability due to new evidence not previously considered.

The Veteran's service-connected atrial fibrillation results in more than four episodes of arrhythmia per year, which meets the criteria for a 30% evaluation.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for neurobehavioral effects, finding that the evidence did not support a link between his condition and exposure to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune during service.

The Veteran's right foot disability is rated at 10 percent, and his post phlebitic syndrome right femoral vein is granted a 40 percent rating. The TDIU issue has been raised but not adjudicated.

The Board has decided to remand the case for further development and clarification of certain comments provided in response to a previous remand. The appellant is seeking service connection under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for an additional left eye disorder resulting from VA surgery.

The Board has remanded the case for a VA examination to address whether the Veteran's bilateral foot disorders are related to his military service, including an in-service injury.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient development of evidence regarding the Veteran's claim for service connection for a blood disorder, including as due to ionizing radiation exposure. Additional development is needed to determine if any current disability related to a blood abnormality was caused by in-service radiation exposure or began during active service.

The Veteran's appeal for a total disability evaluation based on individual unemployability (TDIU) has been dismissed due to the death of the appellant.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient medical opinions regarding the Veteran's insomnia and its relationship to his service-connected sleep apnea, as well as whether any acquired psychiatric sleep disability is superimposed on a personality disorder.

The Board denied the Appellant's claim for accrued benefits, finding that he is not a child or eligible to receive such benefits as executor of the widow's estate. The expenses were paid by the widow's estate and not by the Appellant.

The appeal was dismissed due to the appellant's death.

The Veteran died during the appeal process, and his claim has been dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to the need for clarification regarding whether the Veteran has an additional disability caused by VA treatment and if so, whether it was due to carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill or error in judgment. The examiner is asked to provide a comprehensive opinion based on the provided medical records and opinions.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to the need for additional development, including obtaining ABCMR records and a medical opinion regarding the appellant's sanity at the time of his discharge.

The Board denied an increased rating for the Veteran's right femur and hip condition on both schedular and extraschedular bases. The Board found that the disability picture was contemplated by the Rating Schedule, thus no extraschedular consideration was warranted.

The Veteran's claim for an evaluation in excess of 20 percent for temporomandibular joint disorder status post osteotomy is denied. The evidence does not show interincisal range of 11 to 20 mm or with dietary restrictions, warranting a higher rating.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a bilateral eye disability, finding that his current condition is not related to active service and more probative than his lay assertions.

The Board has granted service connection for basal cell epithelioma, finding that the condition is as likely as not due to service exposure. The decision resolves reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran.