Other conditions decisions — 2000

The Board has found that the veteran's schizoid personality disorder was made worse by his service-connected defective hearing, and thus grants service connection for this condition.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim for service connection for the residuals of a right foot injury and found that new and material evidence has been submitted. The claim is now considered on its merits.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for her nasal fracture and gynecological disability, finding that the evidence did not warrant a higher rating under the applicable VA rating criteria.

The VA denied the claim for an earlier effective date for aid and attendance benefits, stating that July 1, 1997 is the earliest allowable effective date based on the facts found.

The veteran's appeal is dismissed due to his death.

The Board found that the claim for service connection for Crohn's disease/ulcerative colitis is not well grounded due to lack of evidence showing a link between the condition and service.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an increased rating for his service-connected chronic back pain syndrome, finding that it did not meet the criteria for a higher evaluation under the applicable VA rating schedule.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for a deviated nasal septum and bilateral patello-femoral syndrome as his claims were not well-grounded.

The Board denied the claim for service connection for right testicle pain (Orchitis) as there is no current diagnosis of a disability.

The Board denied the veteran's claims of service connection for ulcerative colitis and degenerative joint disease of multiple joints, as well as his request for an increased rating for spondylolisthesis L5-S1. The evidence did not support a finding that these conditions were related to his military service.

The veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for defective vision in the left eye as a result of treatment administered by VA is denied because there is no competent medical evidence to support that his current vision loss is related to the incident.

The veteran's death was caused by a drowning accident, not due to a service-connected disability. Therefore, the appellant is not eligible for benefits under the Restored Entitlement Program for Survivors (REPS).

The veteran's death was not due to a service-connected disability, and he did not meet the criteria for burial or plot allowance benefits. The claim is denied.

The veteran's claim for an effective date prior to September 20, 1984 for the grant of service connection for his wounds received in service was granted. The veteran also has been awarded a rating of 10 percent for venous insufficiency of the right lower extremity and a rating of 10 percent for arthritis of the right ankle.

The Board denied increased evaluations for the veteran's hiatal hernia with reflux and duodenal ulcer, finding that the symptoms did not meet criteria for a higher evaluation. The issue of an increased evaluation for tendonitis of the left shoulder was withdrawn by the veteran.

The veteran's overpayment of benefits due to underreporting income was denied a waiver, as the fault lies with the veteran and repayment would not result in undue financial hardship.

The VA denied service connection for large cell carcinoma of the lung due to tobacco use as it was not shown in service or within a presumptive period, and is precluded by law.

The Board determined that the veteran's claim for service connection for Marfan's syndrome with scoliosis and back pain due to aggravation is not well-grounded because there is no evidence showing that his pre-existing condition was aggravated during service.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for a compensable evaluation for his right elbow disability from June 1, 1988 to May 24, 1995 and from May 25, 1995 onwards. The appeal is based on service connection without any presumption or exposure basis.

The Board denied the claim for service connection for the cause of death due to radiation exposure and also denied the DIC benefits under section 1151 as the claim is not well grounded.