Other conditions Board decisions

The VA examiners determined that the sebaceous cysts and verrucoid keratosis are separate conditions with no causal relationship between them or to service, including herbicide exposure.

The Board finds that arthritis of the right foot manifested to a compensable degree within one year of service separation and is etiologically related to service, granting service connection for this condition.

The Board has decided to remand the case for further development due to outstanding VA medical records from Portland VAMC.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for residuals from a head injury or concussion was denied as there is no credible evidence of an in-service head injury or concussion.

The Veteran's initial disability ratings for right and left knee disabilities have been granted, but the assigned initial ratings of 10 percent are maintained as they do not meet the criteria for a higher rating based on current range of motion findings.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for a bilateral foot disorder was denied, but his claim to reopen the previously denied schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder and PTSD claims was granted due to new evidence.

The Board found that the appellant is not eligible for VA death pension benefits due to a lack of qualifying service. The appeal regarding service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death was also denied.

The Veteran's claim for an initial compensable disability rating for chronic pancreatitis was denied by the Board of Veterans' Appeals. The evidence did not show any confirmed attacks of severe abdominal pain due to pancreatitis during the relevant period.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have a current right eye disability related to the removal of a benign lesion in 1999, and therefore, denied service connection for primary acquired melanosis without atypia of the right eye.

The Veteran does not have a chronic disability involving the right little finger as a result or consequence of disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by her active military service.

The Board has determined that a 10 percent disability evaluation is warranted for the service-connected olecranon protuberance of the left elbow throughout the appeal period.

The Board has determined that a VA examination is needed to determine if the Veteran currently has Crohn's Disease and whether it is related to service, including service in Korea. The case will be returned for further action.

The Veteran's death pension claim was denied due to the Appellant's income exceeding the applicable maximum annual pension rate for a surviving spouse. The cause of death and right hand disability rating claims were also denied.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal on the claim of service connection for residuals of a back injury before the Board could make a decision.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for right elbow and right hand disabilities are being remanded due to the need for a VA examination to determine if current disabilities are related to his active military service.

The Board has granted service connection for low back and right hip disorders, finding that the Veteran's current conditions are related to his military service in Vietnam.

The Board has determined that the Appellant is not entitled to an apportionment of the Veteran's VA disability compensation benefits due to a divorce occurring prior to the effective date of the award and because she is no longer eligible for spousal benefits.

The Board finds that the debt assessed against the Veteran in the amount of $7,675.00 is valid and that the effective dates for removing his former spouse as a dependent and adding his current wife are correct.

The Veteran claims service connection for a left hernia repair, which he alleges was caused by an abdominal injury during his military service. The VA is remanded to determine if the current left hernia is related to any in-service injury and to provide a medical examination.

The Board has dismissed the appeal due to the death of the appellant, and no jurisdiction remains to adjudicate the merits of this claim.