Other conditions decisions — 2001

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim for service connection for residuals of flash burns to both eyes and determined that new evidence submitted by the veteran is sufficient to reopen the claim. The RO will now conduct further examination and obtain any necessary medical records to determine if a current eye disorder is related to service.

The Board has determined that the veteran's pelvic inflammatory disease, endometriosis and perimetritis were not incurred in or aggravated by military service.

The veteran's claim for an increased evaluation for his service-connected right zygomatic bone fracture with dental malocclusion is being remanded due to the need for additional medical examination and compliance with prior Board orders.

The appellant's service, consisting of recognized guerrilla and Regular Philippine Army service prior to July 1, 1946, does not meet the requirements for nonservice-connected pension benefits.

The Board has determined that the appellant is no longer entitled to an apportionment of the veteran's compensation benefits as she was not living with him at the time her claim was filed and subsequently divorced.

The appellant is not eligible for VA death pension benefits as the surviving spouse of the veteran due to her divorce from him in September 1963, which was based on extreme and repeated acts of cruelty by the veteran.

The Board denied the veteran's application to reopen his line of duty determination, finding no new and material evidence that would allow for service connection for residuals of a motor vehicle accident.

The Board found that the overpayment at issue was due to VA's administrative error in failing to adjust the veteran's compensation benefits after his divorce, and thus denied the veteran's request for waiver of recovery.

The Board denied the veteran's request for waiver of recovery of an overpayment of nonservice-connected disability pension benefits due to bad faith on his part in not reporting his employment and income, leading to a $29,000.00 debt.

The Board has determined that recovery of the overpayment would not be against the principles of equity and good conscience, as the veteran is solely at fault in creating the overpayment. The evidence does not show undue financial hardship or unjust enrichment.

The Board found that the veteran's residuals of multiple gastrointestinal surgeries are primarily manifested by continuous episodes of constipation with pain and occasional dysphagia and regurgitation, warranting a 30 percent evaluation. The current rating adequately compensates for his disability.

The Board denied service connection for compensation purposes for dental trauma and also denied a higher evaluation for Behçet's syndrome. The veteran was not granted any new evidence to reopen his claim for dental trauma.

The Board has determined that the appellant meets the criteria to be recognized as the veteran's surviving spouse for purposes of VA benefits, given their separation was without fault on her part.

The Board found that the November 1966 rating action was not CUE and denied the claim for an earlier effective date for a 40% disability rating.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals denied the veteran's claim for service connection for a right elbow injury with degenerative joint disease or tendinitis, as well as his claims for service connection for disabilities of the right and left knees, and for a back disability. The RO had previously denied these claims in August 1994.

The Board found that the veteran's fatal injuries were not incurred in the line of duty due to his voluntary intoxication at the time of the motor vehicle accident.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have a current disability involving his hands and feet due to service-related cold weather injuries, and thus cannot establish service connection for residuals of frozen hands and feet.

The Board found no evidence of an undiagnosed illness manifested by joint and muscle pain, fatigue, dizziness, decreased vision, memory loss, or a loss of concentration associated with the veteran's active service. The preponderance of medical evidence did not indicate these disabilities were related to service or illness associated with service.

The Board has dismissed the appellant's claims due to her failure to respond to VA requests for information and evidence, resulting in abandonment of her claims.

The Board found that the overpayment of $2,024 was not validly incurred due to evidence indicating entitlement to pension benefits during the period in question. As a result, recovery of this amount is precluded.