Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has decided that remand is necessary due to procedural issues and the need for additional financial information.

The Board denied a compensable rating for gout arthritis, finding that the Veteran's condition was stable and did not cause any functional impairment or exacerbations.

The Veteran's chest wall pain rating and TDIU claim are being remanded due to the need for additional development of his Social Security records.

The Board has found that a remand is necessary due to the inadequacy of the VA examination and medical opinion provided in the previous appeal. The Veteran's current sleep disturbance disorder may be related to his active service or any service-connected conditions, but further evaluation by a qualified examiner is required.

The Veteran's appeal was dismissed due to their death, and the Board has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of this appeal at this time.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to a need for an addendum opinion regarding whether the Veteran's dental surgery aggravated his current dental disability.

The Board denied the reduction in VA disability compensation for military drill pay from October 2015 through August 2016, finding that the creation of the overpayment was valid and not solely due to VA administrative error.

The Veteran's appeal for higher ratings than currently assigned for his service connected bronchiectasis has been denied. The RO granted a rating at 30 percent, effective from February 23, 2011. The Board found that the criteria for a higher rating have not been met.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and service connection have been remanded due to incomplete VA examinations. The initial compensable rating for bilateral chronic conjunctivitis is denied, while the left eye corneal erosion claim has resulted in a 20 percent rating.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for heart bypass, finding that there is no evidence of a chronic disease present at discharge or within one year after discharge. The Board also found that the Veteran's chest pain during service was not related to his later coronary artery disease.

The Veteran's claims for an increased disability rating and TDIU are remanded due to the need for additional development, including a VA examination. The propriety of reducing his service-connected athlete's foot disability rating is also remanded.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for an apportionment of the Veteran’s VA disability compensation benefits, finding that it would result in undue hardship on the Veteran.

The Veteran's skin condition, including as due to service in the Southwest Asia Theater of Operations during the Persian Gulf War, is remanded for further examination and medical opinion.

The Veteran withdrew his claim for a compensable rating for his service-connected right leg shin splints before the Board could make a decision.

The Veteran's service-connected right ankle disability, which includes a fracture of the right talus and shin splint, has been rated at 10 percent since July 1978. The Board found that his current condition warrants an increased rating to 20 percent due to marked limitation of motion in the ankle.

The VA denied compensation for atrial fibrillation as the condition was not caused by carelessness, negligence, or similar fault on part of VA. The Veteran's atrial fibrillation is attributed to his nonservice-connected coronary artery disease and hypertension.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining outstanding non-VA treatment records and scheduling a VA psychological examination to determine if the appellant was insane at the time of misconduct leading to his discharge under other than honorable conditions.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical opinions regarding the relationship between the respiratory disability and service-connected tinnitus, as well as the potential aggravation of any pre-existing condition.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to issues with the competency of the VA examiner who provided an opinion regarding the Veteran's stuttering condition. The Veteran is required to undergo a new examination by a licensed speech pathologist.

The appeal has been dismissed due to the death of the appellant, and no service connection is granted.