Other conditions decisions — 2005

The Board denied the appellant's request for an apportionment of the veteran's VA compensation benefits, finding that the veteran was reasonably discharging his responsibility for the spouse's support and that hardship did not exist to warrant such an apportionment.

The Board determined that the appellant's discharge under other than honorable conditions due to AWOL is a bar to VA benefits, including healthcare.

The case is being remanded for the RO to consider a new expert medical opinion and readjudicate the service connection claim.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim of service connection for a chronic prostate disorder, and will now consider whether new evidence supports this reopening.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development due to the need for adequate notice and assistance in substantiating his claim.

The Board denied the veteran's request to reopen his claim for service connection for residuals of a left forearm injury, finding that no new and material evidence had been received.

The VA determined that the veteran's post-traumatic neuritis does not warrant an increase beyond the current 10% rating due to moderate incomplete paralysis. The evidence did not support a higher rating based on other diagnostic codes or conditions.

The Board has determined that the evidence received since the December 1994 decision does not constitute new and material evidence to reopen the claim for veteran status and basic eligibility for VA benefits.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for death pension benefits because her spouse did not serve during a period of war, and thus is not eligible for these benefits.

The Board denied the veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) as there was no verified in-service stressor and the evidence did not establish that PTSD was incurred or aggravated during his active duty service.

The veteran's claim for waiver of recovery of his indebtedness in the amount of $441.00 was granted as it would be against equity and good conscience to collect this debt due to the fault of VA, the undue financial hardship caused by collection, and the advanced age and fixed income of the veteran.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals has remanded the case for further development and review, including obtaining a medical opinion regarding whether the veteran's treatment was necessary due to an emergency condition.

The Board denied service connection for the claimed conditions, finding no evidence of a causal link between the current disabilities and the veteran's military service.

The Board has determined that the cause of the veteran's death, cardiac arrhythmia, is not service-connected.

The veteran's postoperative pelvic inflammatory disease with endometriosis has been rated at 30 percent since May 1998, and the claim for a higher rating is denied.,Prior to October 18, 2002, the veteran was not entitled to an increased rating for migraines as her attacks did not meet the criteria for a 30 percent rating under VA's Rating Schedule.

The Board found that the evidence does not establish a link between the veteran's macular degeneration and his military service, including any exposure to Rickettsial disease.

The Board denied the veteran's request for waiver of overpayment of improved pension benefits, finding that his intentional failure to report additional income from rental property resulted in an overpayment. The decision also noted that the veteran was aware of the need to report changes in income but did not do so.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for a lung condition, other than calcified lymph nodes, due to herbicide exposure. The evidence did not support a link between his current asthma and military service.

The veteran's daughter is not entitled to additional educational assistance benefits beyond the maximum of 45 months due to her eligibility and the lack of circumstances allowing for an extension.

The Board found that the veteran's residuals of a pilonidal cystectomy do not warrant a rating in excess of 10 percent, as they do not meet the criteria for higher ratings under the revised VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities effective August 30, 2002.