Skin conditions (dermatitis, eczema, psoriasis) decisions — 2003

The veteran's appeal is being remanded due to his request for a videoconference hearing at the RO.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded due to conflicting evidence regarding his psoriatic arthritis and the need for further evaluation of his low back and left knee disabilities. The RO must obtain recent VA medical records, conduct a VA examination, and then review the claims file again.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim and found that new evidence supports a finding of service connection for a skin disorder due to exposure to Agent Orange. The veteran currently participates in treatment for a skin condition related to his period of active service.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development and compliance with the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000.

The Board has determined that the veteran's nonspecific dermatitis is related to service, but his skin tags are not. The Board granted service connection for the nonspecific dermatitis and denied service connection for the skin tags.

The appeal has been dismissed as the appellant withdrew their appeal prior to a decision being made.

The veteran's claims for service connection for pseudofolliculitis barbae and right great toe condition were denied. The claim for an increased rating for lumbosacral strain was granted, with a current disability rating of 40 percent.

The Board denied service connection for acne vulgaris, hidradenitis of the left axilla, and a psychiatric disorder. The nerve damage was not considered proximately due to a service-connected disability.,Service connection was not granted as there is no evidence of an in-service injury or disease that led to these conditions.

The Board denied the veteran's claims of service connection for tinea corporis and neurodermatitis secondary to exposure to herbicides, as well as his claim for hypertension. The evidence did not support a finding that these conditions were incurred in or aggravated by military service.

The Board incorrectly determined that the veteran was employable due to his service-connected disabilities, despite evidence showing he was unemployable. The decision is reversed.

The Board has ordered further development due to pending issues and is remanding the case back to the RO for additional consideration.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to new evidence received and invalidated regulations, requiring additional development before a final decision can be made.

The veteran's service-connected disabilities do not prevent him from securing or following a substantially gainful occupation.

The veteran's claim for vocational rehabilitation training under Chapter 31 was denied because he is qualified for suitable employment but does not obtain or retain such employment for reasons within his control.