Other conditions Board decisions

The Board found that the Veteran's back disability was not caused by VA medical care, and thus denied his claim under 38 U.S.C. § 1151.

The Board has determined that the appellant is a veteran for the purpose of establishing entitlement to one-time payment from the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund, based on evidence showing his service with recognized guerrilla units in the U.S. Army during World War II.

The Veteran withdrew their appeal before the Board could make a decision.

The Veteran's service treatment records do not show any complaints, treatment, or diagnosis of flatfeet during his military service. There is no current diagnosis of flatfeet in the medical evidence. The Board finds that the Veteran does not have a current disability related to service and therefore cannot establish service connection for flatfeet.

The Board found no evidence of a diagnosed condition related to the in-service extraction of all upper teeth, and thus denied service connection for residuals of a dislocated jaw. The claim for compensation for tooth extraction was also denied as there is no chronic disability present.

The appeal has been dismissed as the Appellant withdrew her appeal in July 2011.

The Veteran seeks service connection for bilateral tarsal tunnel syndrome. The Board has determined that an additional medical opinion is needed to determine the etiology of the Veteran's current bilateral foot disorder and whether it is related to service or a service-connected disability.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining complete outpatient records and scheduling an examination to determine if the Veteran's respiratory disorder and skin disorder are related to his presumed Agent Orange exposure.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's myelodysplastic syndrome is related to herbicide exposure during service, including Agent Orange and benzene. As a result, the claim for service connection is granted.

The Veteran's hiatal hernia and intermittent diarrhea are currently rated at 10 percent, which is the maximum rating available under Diagnostic Code 7346.

The Board has determined that the appellant demonstrated bad faith in connection with the creation of the DIC overpayment, and therefore precluded consideration of a waiver. The appeal is denied.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded for additional development to determine the appropriate evaluation of his service-connected dermatographic urticaria since 1995, including consideration of both pre-2002 and post-2002 rating criteria.

The VA determined that the Veteran's bilateral aphakia due to postoperative cataracts does not warrant an evaluation in excess of 30 percent.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and initial compensable ratings for his service-connected intervertebral disc syndrome, sensory deficits of the left lower extremity, and sensory deficits of the right lower extremity are being remanded due to the need for additional development.

The Veteran's skin disorders of the nose, chest, and upper back are found to be due to his military service. The claim for tinnitus is granted.

The Veteran's appeal was dismissed due to his death during the pendency of the appeal.

The Veteran's unauthorized private medical expenses incurred at St. John's Regional Medical Center from February 18, 2009 to February 23, 2009 were not reimbursable due to the presence of pre-existing coverage under a private health insurance plan.

The Veteran's Raynaud's syndrome with thoracic outlet syndrome due to protein-S deficiency was initially granted and assigned a 10 percent disability evaluation effective from July 29, 2003.,Effective August 4, 2009, the Veteran's disability rating for his Raynaud's syndrome with thoracic outlet syndrome due to protein-S deficiency was increased to 40 percent.

The Veteran's spontaneous pneumothorax of the left lung is currently asymptomatic and does not warrant a compensable rating under VA disability evaluation criteria.

The Board dismissed the appeal due to the death of the appellant, and no jurisdiction remains for further action.