Other conditions Board decisions

The Veteran's service-connected eye disability, characterized by dry eyes and exophthalmos, has been rated at 10 percent since the initial grant of service connection. The condition does not meet criteria for higher ratings due to lack of visual impairment or incapacitating episodes.

The Board has dismissed the Veteran's appeals for higher ratings for his right and left foot disabilities as he withdrew these issues prior to a decision being made.

The Board denied service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death, finding that Reynaud’s syndrome did not contribute to his sepsis and was not a primary or contributory cause of death. The decision is based on conflicting medical opinions.

The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for service connection for colon cancer, finding that his exposure to aircraft fuel and asbestos in service are etiological factors for his development of colon cancer.

The Board has remanded the case due to non-compliance with previous remand directives and a need for readjudication based on all available evidence.

The Veteran's right foot ulcer was caused by carelessness, negligence, or similar instance of fault on the part of VA during an August 26, 2016 procedure. The left foot ulcer is not considered a result of such fault.

The Board has granted service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death, finding that his myelofibrosis and resulting acute myeloid leukemia and blast crisis are related to his in-service herbicide agent exposure.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection due to exposure to Agent Orange or other chemicals, including brain tumor, skin condition (claimed as excessive sweating), and restless leg syndrome. The VA is directed to conduct additional development regarding the Veteran's exposure history and provide a comprehensive examination.

The Board has remanded the case due to an inadequate VA examination, and a new medical opinion is needed to determine if the Veteran's neck condition is related to his military service.

The Board has decided to remand the case for further development and determination regarding the Appellant's eligibility for reimbursement of last illness expenses, as well as determining the interval between the onset of the Veteran's last sickness and his death.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's vitiligo began during his active service and grants service connection for this condition.

The appeal regarding the waiver of recovery of VA compensation benefits has been dismissed due to the Veteran's death.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for IgA nephropathy with microscopic hematuria, finding that there was no evidence linking his current condition to his military service.

The Veteran's earlier effective date for a 30% rating for dental condition is granted as of July 18, 2015.,The Veteran's earlier effective date for service connection for nose condition is granted as of January 1, 1994.

The Veteran's death was not due to a service-connected disability, and there is no evidence of exposure to herbicides. Therefore, the claim for DIC on the basis of cause of death and dependency and indemnity compensation (DIC) are both denied.

The Board has remanded the case for issuance of a Statement of the Case on the issue of an earlier effective date prior to August 1, 1990 for the grant of DIC benefits. The appellant must file a timely substantive appeal if she wishes to proceed with this claim.

The Board found that the overpayment of VA educational assistance benefits was valid and ordered it to be upheld.

The Board has decided to remand the Veteran's claims for service connection due to insufficient evidence regarding his periods of active and reserve duty, as well as a need for an opinion on whether his spinal cord disorder was aggravated by military service.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a dental disorder, finding that there is no evidence to support a link between his current condition and his military service.

The Board has dismissed the appeal as the appellant did not submit a timely notice of disagreement with the February 2016 apportionment decision.