Other conditions Board decisions

The Veteran's claim for a compensable rating for dyshidrosis of the hands and feet with distal onycholysis and subungual debris of the 10 fingernails and two great toes was denied as his skin disorder did not cover at least 5 percent of the entire body or at least 5 percent of exposed areas affected, and he had not been treated with intermittent systemic therapy such as corticosteroids or other immunosuppressive drugs.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's skin disability, which includes post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation and furunculosis, warrants a rating of 60 percent as of October 25, 2016. This is based on recurrent debilitating episodes occurring at least four times in the past year despite continuous immunosuppressive therapy.

The Board has reopened the claim for service connection for a skin rash and granted it, finding that there is sufficient evidence to relate the condition to active duty. Service connection was denied for diabetes mellitus and an acquired psychiatric disability other than PTSD.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's right hip avascular necrosis did not manifest during a period of active duty service and therefore, cannot be granted on a presumptive basis. Additionally, because his left hip avascular necrosis was severed in an August 2015 rating decision, secondary service connection for the right hip condition is also denied.

The Veteran's eligibility for Dependents' Educational Assistance (DEA) was granted with an effective date of September 25, 2002. Prior to this date, the Veteran did not meet the criteria for DEA due to his total service-connected disability being permanent in nature.

The Board has remanded the case due to failure to comply with previous directives and an error in the caption of the claim.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have a diagnosed vision or skin disability, and any current disabilities are not related to his service. Therefore, service connection for these conditions is denied.

The Veteran's cold weather injury residuals and associated peripheral neuropathy have been rated at the highest possible disability ratings, resulting in a combined rating of 100 percent. This has rendered moot his claim for TDIU.

The Board finds that the Veteran's claimed conditions are not service-connected due to lack of causation and no fault on the part of VA.,VA medical care did not result in new chronic disabilities or worsen existing ones, as determined by multiple VA examiners.

The Veteran withdrew her appeal regarding the increased rating for her heart murmur, grade 2/6 at the aortic area before the Board could make a decision.

The Board finds that the Veteran's squamous cell carcinoma of the left tonsil and metastatic level II lymph nodes is at least as likely as not related to his military service, specifically exposure to Agent Orange. As such, the claim for service connection is granted.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for additional development, including obtaining an electroretinogram and a VA eye examination.

The Veteran's appeal was dismissed due to his death prior to a decision being made.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's arterial and venous disorders, to include blood clots and pulmonary embolism, were not incurred in or a result of active military service and have not been shown to be caused or aggravated by his service-connected left foot disability.

The Veteran's right hip disability is not service-connected as it is more likely age-related and unrelated to his in-service injury. The Board found the evidence does not support a finding of service connection.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for a skin disorder, including as due to herbicide exposure, is being remanded for additional development.

The Veteran's cause of death was not service-connected, but he was receiving non-service-connected pension benefits. The Board has granted burial benefits for the Veteran based on his receipt of such benefits.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a gynecological disability, including residuals of an in-service pregnancy and therapeutic abortion. The VA examiner concluded that there was no objective medical evidence to establish complications or residuals related to the Veteran's pregnancy or therapeutic abortion.

The Board found that the Veteran's loss of vision in the right eye is not related to his service, including exposure to radiation. The opinion from a VA examiner stated that it was less likely caused by his tour of duty and more likely due to a pituitary tumor.

The Veteran's post-vasectomy pain syndrome is service-connected, but his right epididymis cyst is not. The Board finds that the preponderance of evidence supports a finding that the post-vasectomy pain syndrome is related to the vasectomy in service.