Skin conditions (dermatitis, eczema, psoriasis) decisions — 2005

The Board has determined that additional medical examinations and opinions are needed to properly adjudicate the veteran's claims for service connection.

The Board found that the veteran's psoriasis was not incurred in or aggravated by active service and could not be presumed to have been incurred during active service due to herbicide exposure.

The Board has determined that the veteran's atopic dermatitis is attributable to service and grants the claim for service connection.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for earlier effective dates and increased evaluation, finding that the criteria were not met.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for hypertension, residuals of a stroke, and TDIU due to lack of evidence supporting these conditions. The veteran was found not to have current disabilities that would warrant service connection.

The Board has ordered additional development due to the veteran not responding to scheduled VA examinations and improper correspondence. The claims for service connection are being remanded.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an evaluation in excess of 10 percent for dermatitis of the lower extremities, finding that the condition is not disabling and does not meet the criteria for a higher rating.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining treatment records and scheduling examinations to determine the etiology of the veteran's claimed conditions.

The Board has granted a 10 percent rating for the veteran's tinea cruris, finding that his daily use of oral medications constitutes a disability picture more consistent with the next higher 10 percent rating under Diagnostic Code 7806.

The Board found that the veteran's present skin disorders were not incurred in or related to his active service, including his time in Vietnam. The VA examiner noted no relationship between any current diagnoses and his service.

The veteran's claims for service connection for diabetes mellitus, peripheral neuropathy of the left and right shoulder, dermatitis (claimed as a skin rash), and vision condition secondary to diabetes mellitus have all been denied. The Board found no evidence linking these conditions to service or Agent Orange exposure.

The Board denied a higher rating for pseudofolliculitis barbae, finding that the veteran's condition does not affect more than 20 percent of his body or require constant systemic therapy.

The veteran's claim for a higher rating for pseudofolliculitis barbae is being remanded due to the need for additional evidence from his treatment records.

The veteran's claims for increased ratings and service connection were denied. The RO assigned a 10 percent rating for bilateral pes planus from November 25, 1997 to December 11, 1998, and later increased the evaluation to 30 percent effective December 11, 1998. Service connection for tinnitus and scalp dermatitis were also denied.

The case is being remanded for a Decision Review Officer hearing and further development.

The Board has reopened the claim for service connection for pseudofolliculitis barbae and granted a 10 percent rating for myositis ossificans of the left femur.

The veteran's claim for a total disability rating based on service-connected disabilities is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining private medical records and conducting further examinations.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for a sinus disorder, lumbosacral strain with neurological manifestations affecting the left leg, chloracne, and peripheral neuropathy of the hands and feet. The evidence submitted did not change the outcome of these decisions.

The veteran's claims for increased ratings and TDIU were denied. The second-degree burn scars on both hands are not compensable, while the acne vulgaris with multiple sebaceous cysts warranted a 30 percent rating prior to August 30, 2002, and a 50 percent rating from that date onwards.

The veteran's claim for service connection for chloracne, which is presumed to be due to exposure to Agent Orange, was denied as there is no evidence of chloracne or any other acneform disease consistent with chloracne within one year of his completion of service in the Republic of Vietnam.