Scars decisions — 2010

The Board finds that the appellant does not meet the requirements for financial assistance for the purchase of an automobile and adaptive equipment or for adaptive equipment only due to his service-connected disabilities.

The Veteran's scar from the removal of a left flank mass does not meet the criteria for a compensable rating under VA's disability evaluation guidelines.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded for a VA examination to determine if his service-connected disabilities render him unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation. Additionally, the SSA records and all outstanding treatment records should be obtained.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development to determine the appropriate rating for his service-connected right eye disability, including any effects of other diagnosed conditions.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities do not meet the criteria for special monthly compensation based on need for aid and attendance or housebound status.

The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for a 10% rating for his service-connected residual scar from the excision of a lump under the left clavicle is denied as no effective date prior to August 30, 2002 is assignable.

The Veteran's claim for a TDIU is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining medical opinions and records from SSA.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, when considered apart from any unrelated conditions, do not render him incapable of obtaining and maintaining substantially gainful employment.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, including depression and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (sinus arrhythmia), did not render him unemployable prior to February 11, 2005. Therefore, the effective date for TDIU is denied.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, including irritable bowel syndrome, depressive disorder, arthralgias in multiple joints, headaches, and fatigue, idiopathic fasciculation (muscle twitching), tinnitus, chondromalacia patella of the bilateral knees, left shoulder tendonitis, post-operative scar tissue, and chronic sinusitis with nosebleeds, do not render him unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, including PTSD, did not render him unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation prior to December 5, 2007. Effective from that date, the RO granted TDIU.

Service connection was granted for scars to the right neck and face, but not for PTSD or malaria. Agent Orange exposure was not shown to be associated with any disability.

The Veteran's initial rating for his service-connected surgical scars resulting from an exploratory laparotomy procedure has been granted and is currently set at 10 percent.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings for varicose veins of the right and left legs were denied as his conditions did not meet the criteria for higher disability ratings under VA rating criteria.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to his request for a Travel Board hearing. The case will be returned to the Board after the hearing.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for higher initial evaluations for his right eyebrow and left knee scars, as well as his service connection claims for coronary artery disease, brain aneurysm, memory loss, and right ear hearing loss. The Veteran's PTSD claim was also denied.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for a skin disorder other than a scar of the right deltoid, to include pityriasis rosea or residuals thereof, was denied as there is no competent medical evidence supporting her claim.

The Veteran's claim for a higher initial rating for her scar was denied as the evidence did not support a rating in excess of 10 percent.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded to the RO for further development, including scheduling a VA examination and obtaining medical records. The Veteran seeks an initial compensable rating for his service-connected appendectomy scar.

The appellant's appeal was dismissed as he did not file a timely substantive appeal to the June 16, 2004 rating decision.