Other conditions decisions — 2004

The Board has denied the veteran's appeal regarding service connection for poliomyelitis. The case is being remanded to the RO for further development and consideration of new evidence.

The Board has remanded the case due to a forfeiture decision, and the issue of entitlement to TDIU is inextricably intertwined with this issue. The veteran's rights to VA benefits are currently under review.

The Board found that the veteran lacks the mental capacity to handle disbursement of VA funds and determined he is incompetent for VA fund disbursement purposes.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for Osgood-Schlatter's disease with patellar tendonitis, finding no current disability and insufficient evidence to support a grant of service connection.

The Board found no evidence of a chronic acquired disorder of the back or feet that was incurred in service, and thus denied both issues.

The case is being remanded for additional development to ensure compliance with the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete records and procedural issues, including a need for VA treatment records from St. Paul VAMC dating back to 1992.

The Board denied the appellant's claims for service connection for acrocyanosis, erythromelalgia, and tenosynovitis. The appeal was also denied regarding eligibility to Dependents' Educational Assistance under 38 U.S.C. chapter 35.

The Board found no evidence of a present or chronic nervous disorder during service and denied the veteran's claim for service connection.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for basic eligibility for nonservice-connected pension benefits due to a lack of threshold service eligibility requirements.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have a current respiratory disability and there is no evidence linking any such disability to service, including exposure to asbestos or ionizing radiation. Therefore, the claim for service connection for a respiratory disability is denied.

The Board denied the veteran's request for a waiver to recover an overpayment of compensation benefits, finding that both the VA and the veteran were at fault in creating the debt. The decision concluded that repayment would not cause undue hardship.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim for service connection due to new and material evidence, but finds that he is not entitled to compensation as his symptoms are attributable to a known clinical diagnosis of depression.

The veteran's overpayment of VA compensation benefits is waived because the fault lies solely with him for failing to notify VA of his incarceration and change in address. The Board finds that repayment would not violate principles of equity and good conscience.

The veteran's claims for service connection and increased rating were denied. The claim for service connection was based on new evidence not previously considered, but the Board found no direct or presumptive link between his conditions and military service.

The veteran's claims for service connection of a left leg disorder and for a dental rating for treatment purposes are being remanded due to the need for further development, including compliance with the Veterans Claims Assistance Act (VCAA).

The Board has reopened the claim for service connection for fibroid tumors, uterus and granted it based on new evidence submitted by the veteran.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for a tooth disability for compensation purposes, finding no evidence of a ratable condition and noting that her only diagnosed issue was gingivitis.

The veteran claims he developed lung disability as a result of VA medical treatment from December 1991 to January 1992. The Board is remanding the case for further development, including obtaining records and seeking medical opinions.

The Board has determined that additional development is required in this case prior to any final appellate review. The claim for educational assistance benefits under Chapter 35, Title 38, United States Code is remanded to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC) in Washington, D.C.