Other conditions decisions — 2004

The Board denied the appellant's eligibility for enrollment and access to VA medical care benefits due to his lack of service-connected disability, failure to provide detailed financial information, and not being in an enrolled status as of January 17, 2003.

The Board denied service connection for the cause of the veteran's death and denied DIC under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1318.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the claim of entitlement to service connection for a psychophysiological cardiovascular reaction, which was previously denied in January 1995.

The Board found no current disability related to the in-service injury and denied service connection for damage to front teeth.

The Board has determined that the veteran's current diagnosis of dementia is linked to his in-service exposure to toxic fuel, and thus service connection for this condition is granted.

The veteran's service-connected herniated nucleus pulposus (HNP) at L5-S1 has been rated as 20 percent disabling since March 1, 2002. The RO increased the rating to 20 percent effective from that date.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have residuals of cold injury to fingers and hands as a result of his service, and thus denied the claim for service connection.

The Board found that the veteran's service-connected right pubis fracture did not cause or contribute to his death due to multiple myeloma. The appellant's claim for service connection for the cause of her husband's death was denied.

The Board has determined that the veteran was not service-connected for any disability at the time of his death, nor were the statutory and regulatory requirements for a nonservice-connected burial allowance met. Therefore, the appellant is denied entitlement to an allowance for burial benefits.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including scheduling a VA examination and complying with notice and duty to assist provisions.

The Board has determined that the claim must be remanded to the RO for adjudication on a de novo basis due to lack of notification and development action, as well as verification of service.

The Board denied the appellant's request to reopen his forfeiture of VA benefits, finding that no new and material evidence had been submitted.

The veteran's claims for increased evaluations for his service-connected right collarbone dislocation and post nasal septoplasty with deformity are being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining medical records and scheduling VA examinations.

The Board has granted service connection for the veteran's chest wall strain and assigned a noncompensable (0 percent) rating, finding that his current condition does not meet criteria for a higher rating due to lack of evidence of rib fractures or respiratory impairment.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for basic eligibility for nonservice-connected pension benefits based on her deceased husband's recognized guerrilla service, finding that it did not meet the requirements for such benefits.

The veteran's claim for an increased evaluation of his service-connected low back disability is being remanded due to the need for updated medical records and a VA examination.

The Board denied the veteran's request for an extension of his delimiting date for Chapter 30 educational assistance benefits, finding that he did not provide evidence of a physical or mental disability preventing him from initiating or completing his chosen program.

The veteran died due to massive blood loss from an esophageal rupture. The Board found that the requirements for a burial allowance and/or a plot or interment allowance were not met as he was not receiving VA benefits at the time of his death, nor did he meet any other eligibility criteria.

The Board dismissed the veteran's appeal as he effectively withdrew his appeal in August 2003, limiting it to his request for a Purple Heart.

The Board found that the appellant's April 2003 Notice of Disagreement was timely filed, allowing him to proceed with his appeal regarding the character of his discharge and its impact on VA benefits.