Other conditions decisions — 2004

The Board has reopened the appellant's claim of legal entitlement to VA disability benefits due to new evidence submitted, but it remains undecided whether this evidence is sufficient to establish service connection.

The Board has dismissed the appeal because a timely substantive appeal was not filed with respect to the January 1991 rating action that denied an increased rating for residuals, GSW of the right calf.

The veteran's appeal is for an increased rating for arrhythmias and chest pain secondary to PTSD, but the RO has only granted service connection for these symptoms due to aggravation of a pre-existing heart disorder. The case is being remanded to consider other heart conditions not yet addressed.

The veteran died of a nonservice-connected cause while in a non-VA facility. The VA does not have the authority to provide burial benefits as he was not discharged for a service-connected disability and did not meet other eligibility criteria.

The veteran's claim for payment of unauthorized medical expenses incurred in September 2000 was denied as the application was not filed within the required time frame.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for residuals of anterior poliomyelitis, finding that there was no evidence to support a direct link between his current condition and his military service.

The VA denied the veteran's claims for increased evaluation of service-connected pulmonary coccidioidomycosis and service connection for PTSD, food poisoning residuals, and a left knee disability.

The Board denied the moving party's claim for VA benefits on the basis that he did not have the requisite military service to establish eligibility for such benefits.

The veteran's claims for increased ratings for his left breast nodule, non-specific rash, and Graves' Disease have been denied. The Board found that the current evaluations adequately reflect the clinical findings.

The Board found that the veteran's death was not caused by negligence or fault on the part of VA staff, and thus denied DIC benefits under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151.

The Board has determined that the veteran's incontinence and sexual dysfunction are related to his service-connected low back disorder.

The Board has determined that the veteran's arthritis is aggravated by his service-connected depression, warranting service connection on a secondary basis.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for additional development and examination, including a VA skin disorders examination.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been presented sufficient to reopen the claim of service connection for the residuals of a back injury, and by extending the benefit of the doubt to the veteran, it is now granted as his pre-existing back disability was aggravated during service.

The Board has determined that the veteran's net worth is a bar to receiving improved pension benefits due to his financial resources being sufficient to meet his basic needs.

The veteran's uveitis and polymorphous dystrophy of both eyes have been rated at 20 percent, which is the maximum schedular rating available. The veteran's ichthyosis vulgaris has not been addressed in this decision. His plantar warts and callosities with metatarsalgia and degenerative changes of the metatarsophalangeal joint are currently evaluated at 10 percent each for both feet.

The Board denied the veteran's eligibility for Chapter 30 educational assistance benefits due to his date of initial entry into service making him ineligible under the program's requirements.

The veteran's application for VA education benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill was denied because he did not meet the basic eligibility criteria, specifically due to his service not meeting the required continuous period of active duty.

The Board has reopened the appellant's claim for service connection for cause of death due to new and material evidence submitted since the last final denial. The case is remanded for further development.

The Board has reopened the appellant's claim regarding whether his character of discharge from service constitutes a bar to VA benefits. The evidence submitted, including medical records suggesting possible insanity at the time of AWOL, is considered significant enough to warrant reconsideration.