Other conditions decisions — 2001

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an earlier effective date of July 29, 1996 for a 10 percent rating for synovitis of the left wrist.

The veteran's daughter submitted an application for accrued benefits, but the claim is denied as there was no pending claim at the time of the veteran's death.

The VA determined that the appellant was not a prisoner of war during his period of recognized service and denied his claim.

The veteran's appeal for higher pension benefits is denied as he was awarded the maximum monthly rate of $749, which is based on his having no income and no dependents.

The veteran's service-connected psychiatric disability, manifested by grossly impaired thought processes, delusions, chronic depression with anxiety insomnia, social withdrawal, somatic problems, and poor family and social relationships, has been found to approximate total social and occupational impairment. The Board has granted a 100 percent rating for the veteran's condition.

The Board denied the waiver of recovery of an overpayment of improved death pension benefits, finding that it would not be against equity and good conscience to require repayment.

The Board found that the evidence showed the veteran was providing reasonable support contributions to the appellant, and thus concluded that it was proper for the RO to terminate the appellant's award of an apportioned share of the veteran's service-connected disability benefits.

The Board has determined that the appellant's chronic bee sting allergy originated during active duty for training and granted service connection for this condition.

The Board found that the overpayment of $28,638.00 was solely due to administrative error and granted a waiver of recovery for this portion of the debt.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the claim of service connection for a skin disorder, including as due to exposure to herbicides. The case is now remanded for further development.

The veteran's claim for Class II outpatient dental treatment was denied because he did not submit an application within the required 90 days of his discharge from active service.

The Board denied compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for visual problems, finding no competent medical evidence linking the veteran's eye issues to VA treatment.

The Board has determined that there is no competent medical evidence linking the veteran's hiatal hernia to his VA treatment, including surgery in 1976. Therefore, the claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for a hiatal hernia is denied.

The veteran's service-connected herniated discs at L4-5 and L5-S1 were evaluated as 20 percent disabling prior to September 26, 1998. Beginning on that date, the disability was rated at 40 percent.

The veteran is entitled to a waiver of the overpayment of work study compensation benefits in the amount of $158.03 due to extenuating circumstances including her service-connected disabilities and financial hardship.

The veteran's appeal for increased ratings for his bilateral foot disorder was denied. The RO had previously granted a noncompensable rating effective from February 19, 1998, and later increased the rating to 10 percent effective from June 10, 1998.

The VA determined that the veteran's service-connected residuals of a subtotal gastrectomy do not warrant an evaluation in excess of 40 percent.

The veteran's appeal for increased ratings for his service-connected bilateral defective hearing was denied. The Board found that the veteran did not meet the schedular criteria for an increased evaluation and concluded that there was no evidence of marked interference with employment or frequent periods of hospitalization due to his hearing loss.

The Board has determined that the veteran is entitled to a 30 percent evaluation for his minor left humerus fracture with ulnar nerve entrapment from February 13, 1996 until July 2, 1997. For the period after July 2, 1997, he is not entitled to an increased rating.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim for service connection for a respiratory disability, but further development is needed before deciding on the merits of the case.