Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has determined that the veteran's current cardiac arrhythmias, including atrial fibrillation and tachycardia, are not etiologically related to service or a service-connected disability.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to support the veteran's claim for service connection of PTSD, including obtaining relevant medical records and SSA disability benefits information.

The veteran is seeking service connection for a personality disorder, but the Board has determined that further development is needed due to allegations of personal assault during military service.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for a skin condition, finding no evidence of a chronic skin disorder during his active duty service and no medical nexus between the claimed condition and herbicide exposure. The appeal was dismissed as the veteran died before any decision could be made.

The Board has determined that the veteran's esophageal carcinoma is not related to his service, including any potential herbicide exposure. The claim for service connection is denied.

The veteran's claim for special monthly compensation based on the need for regular aid and attendance is being remanded due to insufficient information provided in previous VCAA notices.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for loss of skin, fingernails, and toenails, all claimed as due to Agent Orange exposure. The evidence received since the February 2002 rating decision does not raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating these claims.

The Board has remanded the case for scheduling a Travel Board hearing at the Oakland, California RO and transferring of RO jurisdiction if necessary.

The Board has determined that the veteran's chronic skin disability of the feet, initially diagnosed in service and continuing to this day, was incurred during his active military service.

The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected residuals of bilateral inguinal hernia repairs do not warrant a compensable evaluation, as there are no current residuals other than surgical scars which do not limit function.

The veteran is seeking to establish service connection for head injury and spinal cord injury that are secondary to his service-connected PTSD. The case must be remanded for further development, including obtaining medical records and scheduling a VA examination.

The veteran's claim for service connection for a personality disorder was denied as it is not considered a disease or injury that can be granted under VA compensation.

The Board has determined that the appellant can be recognized as the veteran's surviving spouse for VA benefits purposes, given her continuous cohabitation with the veteran and lack of remarriage since his death.

The veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for residuals of a cerebral vascular accident (CVA) is denied as there is no evidence that the CVA or its residuals were caused by VA medical care.

The Board has ordered a remand to allow the appellant to provide information about her income and any unreimbursed medical expenses for herself and her son, including in order to determine if M.A. qualifies as a helpless child.

The veteran seeks payment or reimbursement for private medical expenses incurred on August 3, 2004 at Doctors Medical Center. The VAMC denied the claim based on a finding that no authorization was provided and that a VA facility was feasibly available. The case is now remanded to determine if prior authorization was granted.

The Board denied the appellant's request for an earlier effective date of February 7, 2001 for DIC benefits due to lack of evidence of a prior claim.

The Board has decided to remand the case for further development, including obtaining additional medical records and scheduling a VA examination.

The Board found that new and material evidence has not been submitted to reopen the veteran's claim for service connection for residuals of a head injury. The claim remains denied.

The Board has ordered the case back to the RO for further action, including obtaining a medical opinion and readjudicating the claim based on all evidence.