Other conditions Board decisions

The Veteran's skin condition and breathing problems are related to his service, with the Board finding that they are not due to an undiagnosed illness. The claims for these conditions have been granted.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining updated VA treatment records and an addendum from the May 2010 VA examiner to address whether the gastroesophageal diverticulum is related to his service-connected major aphthous stomatitis.

The Board found no evidence of a low back disorder in service and insufficient credible supporting evidence for the claimed PTSD stressor. The Veteran's current back pain is not related to her military service.

The Board found that the Veteran's skin disability of the right hand was not incurred or aggravated in service and denied his claim.

The Veteran's skin condition, Telangiectasia Macularis Eruptive Persistans (TMEP), was rated at the maximum disability rating of 60% effective June 14, 2010. The condition affects more than 40 percent of her total body area and is not considered exceptional or unusual.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's claim of March 1991 remains on appeal. Additional development is required to determine if new and material evidence has been received to reopen his claim for service connection for deformity of the feet.

The appellant's annual income exceeded the maximum allowable for improved death pension benefits, resulting in denial of her claim.

The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for his right inguinal hernia residuals was denied as the evidence did not show that the condition warranted a compensable rating prior to July 2005.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's claim for service connection for recurrent right leg cellulitis cannot be granted as there is no current disability and no evidence of recurrence since his last treatment in 2001 or 2002.

The Veteran has been diagnosed with costochondritis/Tietze's syndrome during and after military service, and the Board finds that this condition is related to his active duty. As such, the claim for service connection is granted.

The Board found that the Veteran's eye disability was not caused or aggravated by VA care, and denied compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151.

The Veteran's Crohn's disease was initially rated at 30 percent effective November 15, 2002. Since January 11, 2010, the disability has been rated as 60 percent due to severe episodes of diarrhea and constant or near-constant purulent discharge from a rectal fistula.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's varicose veins of the left lower extremity are related to service and grants his claim for service connection.

The Veteran's claim for an increased disability rating for his left fourth metacarpal fracture is being remanded due to the need for additional evidence and a new VA examination.

The Board has granted service connection for a chronic coccygeal disorder to include arthritis, finding that it was initially manifested during wartime service and presumed to have been present due to a congenital defect. The Veteran's pre-existing condition is considered presumptively incurred in service.

The Board finds that there is no current evidence of a diagnosed condition of gastroenteritis or gastritis, and thus the claim for service connection for these conditions cannot be granted.

The Board has reopened the Veteran's claim for service connection for a stomach disorder and finds that there is sufficient evidence to establish that his current symptoms are related to his active military service. The Board also finds that he does not have Barrett's esophagus, as it is not considered a disability for VA compensation purposes.

The Board has determined that the appellant does not have a current neurological disorder and there is no evidence of such in service or for many years after service. The claim for service connection is denied.

The Board denied the appellant's claim of being recognized as the Veteran's surviving spouse for dependency and indemnity compensation due to her divorce from the Veteran, which was not set aside by a court of competent jurisdiction prior to his death.

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