Other conditions decisions — 2002

The Board denied the veteran's request for a waiver of indebtedness due to an untimely submission, despite the veteran claiming he did not understand his right to request a waiver.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for revocation of forfeiture of benefits, finding that he knowingly submitted false or fraudulent documents in support of his VA benefit claims. The decision is based on the forgery of documents from 1945.

The case is being remanded due to the failure of the RO to adjudicate the intertwined claim for service connection for hemorrhagic gastritis. The veteran's digestive disability will be rated again, and any benefit for which a notice of disagreement has been filed must be reconsidered.

The Board found that the appellant's left sacroiliitis existed prior to service and was not aggravated by active duty. As a result, the claim for service connection was denied.

The Board found that the veteran's left shoulder and upper back disability, originally claimed as back pain, warrants a 10 percent evaluation based on slight impairment of Muscle Group II (rhomboid muscle). The veteran's complaints include chronic myofascial scapular pain with mild paraspinal spasms in the rhomboidal region, limited lateral bending on the left, and minimal forward flexion due to marked pain subjectively. A 20 percent evaluation is not appropriate as there is no evidence of moderate impairment of Muscle Group II.

The veteran's claim for an increased evaluation of his service-connected varicose veins of the right leg was denied as he failed to report for a scheduled VA examination without good cause.

The VA determined that the appellant's cardiovascular disease is not service-connected, as there was no evidence of such condition during his military service and it did not become manifest within one year after his retirement. The Board found that the appellant's cardiovascular disease may be presumed to have been incurred due to exposure to herbicides in Vietnam.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals has determined that the veteran's multiple joint arthritis was not incurred in or aggravated by service and may not be presumed to have been incurred in service. The claim for service connection is denied.

The Board has determined that the appellant does not have qualifying 'active service' for purposes of VA pension benefits and therefore is not entitled to nonservice-connected disability or 'old age' pension.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an increased rating for his service-connected left navicular fracture with non-union, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating based on ankylosis of the wrist.

The Board found that the appellant's net worth is a bar to his receipt of improved pension benefits, as it exceeds the amount deemed reasonable for covering his living expenses.

The veteran's service connection for osteochondritis dissecans of the left medial femoral condyle was granted with a 10 percent rating effective from November 17, 2000. The claim for arthritis or rheumatism of both legs remains unresolved.

The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected varicose veins of the left lower extremity do not warrant a rating in excess of 20 percent.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for an effective date earlier than February 10, 1999 for the award of DIC benefits. The decision stated that her October 1997 informal claim was considered abandoned and her January 1998 and January 1999 letters were not received by the RO.

The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected stress fractures of the right and left tibial shafts do not warrant a higher rating as they are currently manifested by subjective complaints of pain and limitations on physical activity, with no significant interference with ambulation or need for frequent medical follow-up care.

The veteran died from a cerebral vascular accident, and the cause of death was not attributed to any service-connected condition. The appellant's claim for service connection based on radiation exposure in service was denied.

The Board found that the veteran's failure to report additional income did not constitute fraud, misrepresentation, or bad faith. The overpayment was created due to his reported change in net worth. Given the veteran's age and financial situation, the Board determined that recovery would be against equity and good conscience.

The Board has determined that the veteran is entitled to an effective date of February 22, 1988 for the award of additional compensation on account of a dependent spouse. This decision was based on evidence provided by the veteran prior to his increased rating in 1992.

The veteran's overpayment of VA improved pension benefits was denied due to bad faith in not reporting changes in his and his wife's income.

The Board denied the veteran's request for a waiver of recovery of an overpayment of $1,567 in VA compensation benefits due to his fault in creating the overpayment and because recovery would not be against equity and good conscience.