Other conditions decisions — 2022

The Board has decided that more evidence is needed to determine the appropriate disability rating for the Veteran's right eye erosion.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for residuals of a brain tumor is being remanded due to the need to obtain and review additional medical records, including the surgical report from his April 2018 brain tumor removal. The examiner must determine if there is at least as likely as not that the Veteran's brain tumor was caused by a head injury sustained during service.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for recognition as a child of the Veteran on the basis of permanent incapacity for self-support prior to attaining age 18 due to her marriage after November 1, 1990.

The Board has granted service connection for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) due to exposure to herbicide agents and other contaminants during active military service. The evidence is at least in equipoise as to whether the Veteran's IPF is related to his service.

The Veteran's sister is not entitled to accrued benefits as there were no pending claims at the time of his death and no available accrued benefits remaining for reimbursement.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the relationship between the Veteran's Merkel cell carcinoma and his military service, including any exposure to herbicide agents. The Veteran will need to provide information about his medical history and undergo a VA examination.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete service dental records and the need for a dental examiner's opinion regarding whether the Veteran sustained dental trauma in service that resulted in his current dental disability, including the loss of tooth #3.

The Board has granted service connection for the Veteran's left eye disability, finding that it had its onset during service and is related to his in-service injury.

The Veteran's appeals for service connection for cerebrovascular accident and neurobehavioral effects, both claimed as due to exposure at Camp Lejeune, have been dismissed because the Veteran died during the appeal process.

The Board has decided to remand the Veteran's claims for Graves' disease, dysphonia, and dysphagia due to insufficient development. The claims will be reviewed again with a focus on whether exposure to non-ionized radiation during service is related to the conditions.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate medical opinions and additional development is required.

The Veteran's claim for a higher rating for gout, affecting both great toes, is being remanded due to the need to consider updated criteria for musculoskeletal disabilities.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete service records and the need to verify the Veteran's exposure to herbicide agents in service, including during his time in Japan. The cause of death is related to hypertensive cardiovascular disease.

The Veteran's eustachian tube dysfunction residuals are granted, and an increased rating of 30 percent for his right great toe arthritis is granted prior to September 15, 2015. From that date onward, the rating remains at 30 percent.

The Board has remanded the claim of service connection for atrial fibrillation and arrhythmia due to inadequate VA opinions. The case must be returned for further examination and opinion regarding whether these conditions are related to service, including presumed herbicide exposure (Agent Orange), or a service-connected disability such as PTSD.

The Veteran's appeal for educational assistance benefits under the Post-9/11 GI Bill was denied because he had already elected and received funds under the MGIB program, which began after August 1, 2011. The Board found that his period of service in September 2012 to January 2016 could not be used for eligibility under both programs.

The Board has remanded the claim of service connection for leukemia due to a lack of a VA examination, and the Veteran's testimony regarding exposure during service.

The Board has remanded the case due to additional development being required, including obtaining updated VA and private treatment records and seeking an opinion on the nature and etiology of the Veteran's eye condition. The focus is on determining whether his blurred vision constitutes a MUCMI or undiagnosed illness, as well as if it was aggravated by environmental hazards in Iraq.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to the need for a new examination regarding the Veteran's eye condition other than photophobia.

The VA denied the Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 as his right hand disability was not caused by any fault on part of VA, and no unforeseen event occurred.