Other conditions decisions — 2004

The Board granted an increased rating to 20 percent for the veteran's service-connected residuals of a healed, surgically treated, and plated fracture of the right (major) forearm, finding that these residuals more nearly approximated limitation of flexion to 90 degrees.

The Board granted a 20 percent evaluation for the veteran's residuals of a fracture of the distal end of the left clavicle from January 5, 2000.

The Board denied the claim of service connection for residuals of a shrapnel wound of the left leg, finding that there was no credible evidence of an in-service injury and no competent evidence linking the current disability to service.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development due to procedural defects in the VCAA and inadequate VA examination.

The Board has ordered the case to be remanded for further development of VA medical records related to the veteran's service-connected foot disorder.

The veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for a total disability evaluation based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities is being remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals.

The Board denied the veteran's increased rating claim for perirectal abscess and did not address his earlier effective date for TDIU.

The Board has granted increased ratings for the left knee and right arm scars, effective May 14, 2003. The veteran's other claims remain denied.

The Board denied a compensable initial disability evaluation for prostatitis, finding that the veteran's condition did not meet the criteria for any of the applicable rating codes.

The Board has reopened the claims for service connection for a nervous disorder and left leg disability, but denied the claim for service connection for phlebitis. The veteran's existing conditions are being evaluated further.

The Board found no evidence of a chronic respiratory disability in service and denied the veteran's claim for service connection.

The Board has remanded the case for further development and evaluation of the veteran's jaw disability, including a VA examination to assess the severity of his condition. The issues are whether he is entitled to higher ratings for his recurrent bony ankylosis of the right mandibular joint prior to February 20, 2002, and from that date forward.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for apportionment of the veteran's nonservice-connected pension benefits, finding that she is not entitled to such benefits due to her divorce from the veteran and lack of legal re-marriage. The veteran's current monthly pension amount would result in undue hardship if any portion were apportioned.

The Board found that the veteran's service-connected residuals of a left lower lobectomy warrant a rating no higher than 30 percent, based on his pulmonary function test results.

The Board granted a 100% disability rating for subacute bacterial endocarditis, effective from the date of the veteran's death in January 1999.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining new VA examinations to assess the current level of impairment from his service-connected right thumb post-traumatic degenerative joint disease with a flexion contracture and from his service-connected neuropathic pain of the right upper extremity.

The veteran's failure to report his marriage and his spouse's income resulted in an overpayment of improved pension benefits, which was denied a waiver due to bad faith.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for additional medical examinations and records. The issues of increased rating for his gastrointestinal disability and a compensable rating for his eye disability are pending.

The Board found that the overpayment in the amount of $1540.20 was properly created due to the veteran's incarceration for a felony conviction, resulting in his compensation rate being reduced from 20% to 10%. The veteran's request for waiver of this debt is pending.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claim for service connection for a bilateral foot disorder cannot be reopened because no new and material evidence was submitted.