Other conditions decisions — 2001

The veteran's subluxation of the 3rd through 5th sternoclavicular joints on the right chest wall is currently rated at 30 percent, effective from October 1999. The RO found that his limitation of motion more nearly approximated a 30 percent evaluation.

The veteran's claim for an increased rating for his service-connected residuals of an appendectomy was granted, but the RO only increased it to 10 percent from 0 percent.

The Board denied an increased rating for the veteran's service-connected left eye disability, finding that a 20 percent evaluation was warranted based on continued 'active eye pathology' as of September 11, 2000.

The veteran's service-connected Spasmodic Dysphonia is rated at 10 percent, while her Adjustment Disorder with Anxious Mood is rated at 30 percent. The decision is mixed as it grants a higher rating for one condition and denies the other.

The Board found that the veteran's bilateral inguinal hernia are not proximately due to or the result of his service connected low back disability. The claim for an increased rating for his service-connected post-operative herniated disc at L4-5 with chronic low back pain and right sciatic radulopathy was also denied.

The veteran's dermatophytosis, currently rated at 10 percent, is not productive of constant exudation or itching, extensive lesions, or marked disfigurement. The criteria for a higher rating are not met.

The Board found that the appellant was not at fault in creating the overpayment and waived recovery of the $8,348.30 debt.

The veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for blindness of the right eye was denied by the RO, as the medical opinions provided did not support a connection between his pre-existing condition and the VA treatment.

The Board has remanded the veteran's claim due to a change in the law regarding service connection claims, and because there is insufficient medical evidence of record to decide his claim. The RO must obtain all outstanding records related to the veteran's back complaints and conduct further development including obtaining VA examinations.

The veteran's death was caused by a retroperitoneal hemorrhage, anticoagulant toxicity, and treatment of cardiac arrhythmia. The VA did not contribute to the cause of his death.

The Board found that the veteran did not have a chronic gastrointestinal disorder during service, and his current condition is not due to exposure to radiation. Therefore, service connection for this condition was denied.

The veteran's thoracic spine disability is manifested by chronic pain, tightness, muscle spasms, and cramping. The RO denied an increased rating for the condition.

The veteran's claim for service connection for residuals of an avulsion fracture of the lateral clavicle with acromioclavicular separation, right (major) is denied as it cannot be granted prior to August 24, 1999.

The Board has denied the veteran's claim for service connection for the cause of his death, which was related to a fall due to his service-connected right knee disability. The appeal is based on the veteran's death and does not involve any issues regarding exposure or service connection.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an increased rating for his service-connected bilateral flatfoot, finding that the current 10 percent rating adequately reflects the level of impairment caused by his condition.

The Board has remanded the case due to a lack of authority for awarding enhanced DIC benefits in a hypothetical entitlement claim and requests additional development, including obtaining relevant medical records.

The Board is remanding the case to determine if new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen a claim of entitlement to service connection for the cause of the veteran's death. The appellant also seeks service connection based on exposure to ionizing radiation, but VA does not need to develop this claim as there is no evidence of such exposure.

The Board has dismissed the matter of direct-payment fee eligibility due to lack of jurisdiction.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an increased evaluation for his right hand disability, finding that the evidence did not warrant a higher rating based on the current level of impairment.

The veteran's claims for increased ratings for service-connected postoperative residuals of a subtotal gastrectomy and postoperative ventral hernia were denied as the veteran failed to report for scheduled VA examinations without good cause. The claim for an increased rating for the gastrectomy was denied as a matter of law, while the claim for a higher initial rating for the ventral hernia resulted in a 10% rating being granted.