Other conditions Board decisions

The Veteran's claim for eligibility to participate in the PCAFC program has been remanded due to errors in legal criteria and inadequate medical opinion. The AOJ must obtain a new medical opinion from CEAT based on updated eligibility criteria, including those set forth in 38 U.S.C. § 1720G(a)(2)(C)(ii)-(iii), and provide the Veteran with complete notice of the decision as required by 38 U.S.C. § 5104.

The Veteran's service connection claim for Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (CML) is granted as it was caused by or related to his presumed in-service exposure to herbicide agents, specifically Agent Orange.

The Board has dismissed the appeal as there is no longer a case or controversy for decision due to VA overturning its initial denial of the claim.

The Board has decided that the attorney fee related to past-due benefits from the April 2021 rating decision is reasonable. However, due to a pre-decisional duty to assist error, the case is being remanded for the AOJ to associate all evidence considered at the time of its November 2021 decision.

The Board has determined that new and relevant evidence has been received to warrant readjudication of the claim for service connection for fibrosis. The Veteran's claim is being remanded for a VA examination.

The Board has found that there is not substantial compliance with its February 2020 remand directives and further development is needed, including obtaining service treatment records and a VA examination to determine the nature and cause of the Veteran's current left hip conditions.

The Board has ordered the Veteran to be examined for urinary incontinence and fecal incontinence, which are not service-connected. The examination will determine if these conditions are related to service-connected disabilities.

The Veteran's prostate disorder is not service connected as it did not have its onset in service and is unrelated to any service-connected disability. The Board found the evidence insufficient to establish a connection between the Veteran's current condition and his military service.

The Board has decided to remand the cases due to the need for additional development, including obtaining medical opinions regarding whether the Veteran's service-connected diabetes mellitus aggravated any right and left eye disorder.

The Veteran withdrew their appeal before a decision was made, so the case is dismissed.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's preexisting scoliosis and kyphosis were not aggravated during his period of active duty service, but further examination is needed to determine if any other current back disability had its onset or is otherwise related to his military service.

The Board has remanded the cases of service connection for a sleep disorder and trench foot due to insufficient reasoning in previous decisions.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for chronic adjustment disorder and HIV related illness were granted with effective dates of June 14, 2011. The Board found that the Veteran did not have an earlier intent to file a claim for these conditions.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to a duty to assist error and will provide new VA medical opinions regarding the etiology of the Veteran's peripheral vascular disease.

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

The Board has decided to remand the cases for additional development due to inadequate opinions in the previous VA examinations.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding whether the Veteran's metastatic adenocarcinoma was directly linked to his presumed in-service exposure to herbicides. The VA examiner needs to provide a detailed opinion addressing the specific facts of the Veteran's case, including his in-service treatment for gastroenteritis.

The Board has remanded the case due to new evidence received since the last final denial, allowing the Veteran's claim for service connection of spinal stenosis. The matter is now before the RO again.

The Board has remanded the case due to new evidence provided by a VA examiner, and the AOJ needs to consider this evidence in their next decision.

The Board has determined that an examination is needed to determine if the Veteran's hiatal hernia had its origin in service or is otherwise related to his active service. The AOJ must obtain any private treatment records and arrange for a VA examination.