Other conditions Board decisions

The Board will remand the case to fulfill VA's notification duties and re-adjudicate the appellant's claim for service connection for the cause of the veteran's death.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development and consideration of the appellant's claim for service connection for the cause of her husband's death. The VA will obtain medical records, employment information, and legal documents related to any lawsuits or claims filed as a result of her husband's exposure to asbestos.

The veteran's claim for an increased evaluation for prostatitis with urethral stricture was granted, and he is now receiving a 20 percent rating effective from December 4, 2001. The original 10 percent rating assigned from July 9, 1971 to December 4, 2001 remains in place.

The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected left eye injury did not result in any residual disability, and his TMJ dysfunction does not meet the criteria for a compensable rating. Therefore, both claims are denied.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for fatigue, including as due to an undiagnosed illness. The evidence did not support a finding that the veteran had chronic fatigue syndrome or any other disability entity manifested by chronic fatigue.

The VA denied a higher initial evaluation for the veteran's service-connected residuals of colon cancer due to radiation exposure, as his condition did not meet the criteria for an increased rating.

The veteran's hidradenitis suppurativa was evaluated for periods prior to and after August 30, 2002. Prior to that date, the condition did not warrant an evaluation in excess of 10 percent. After that date, the condition has been essentially asymptomatic with no active lesions.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral shin splints, finding no evidence of a current disability or link to service.

The Board has determined that the veteran's period of service from May 27, 1983 to April 10, 1987 was dishonorable due to willful and persistent misconduct. As a result, this period is not considered honorable for VA purposes and benefits are barred.

The Board has remanded the case to the RO for further development due to inadequate VCAA notice and other procedural issues.

The Board has ordered additional development to locate the veteran's service medical records and clarify certain responses from the National Personnel Records Center. The appeal will be remanded for these purposes.

The Board found no evidence of hair loss during service and insufficient medical opinion to link current hair loss to service or a nervous disorder. The claim for service connection is denied.

The Board has dismissed the appeal due to the death of the veteran.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including a VA examination to determine if the veteran's current respiratory disability is related to his in-service asbestos exposure.

The Board has determined that further development is needed to determine the cause of the veteran's death and any relationship between his cancer and exposure to herbicide agents. The appellant must provide medical records from providers who treated the veteran for his cancer, including Dr. Toller and Dr. Kittrell.

The veteran's appeal was dismissed because they died during the pendency of the appeal, and thus the Board has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of this claim.

The Board denied reopening the claim for service connection for the cause of the veteran's death due to lack of new and material evidence.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for residuals of a neck injury, residuals of the excision of a ganglion cyst on her left great toe, and a dental disorder.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been received to reopen the claim for service connection for varicose veins of the left leg with deep vein thrombosis, finding that the veteran's pre-existing condition worsened during service.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to properly evaluate the veteran's claim for a rating in excess of 20 percent for dendritic keratitis of the right eye, with ptosis. The case will be remanded to the RO for further action.