Other conditions decisions — 2005

The Board has determined that the submitted evidence is not new and material, thus denying the reopening of claims for service connection for nervousness, a chest disorder, or dizziness due to head injury.

The veteran is seeking service connection for a left eye injury, but his service medical records are unavailable due to fire. The Board has remanded the case for further development and consideration of alternative forms of evidence.

The veteran's claim for payment of unauthorized medical expenses is being remanded due to the lack of VA records and clinical reports from various physicians. The case will be reviewed again with all pertinent regulations and judicial mandates, and a Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC) will be prepared if necessary.

The appeal has been dismissed as the appellant requested withdrawal of their appeal before a decision was made.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for pulmonary fibrosis as a result of asbestos exposure, finding that there was no evidence of current asbestos-related conditions.

The veteran's appeal for earlier effective dates has been dismissed due to his death.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for obstructive and restrictive pulmonary disease, including a chronic disability manifested by shortness of breath due to an undiagnosed illness. The VA found that there was no evidence linking the current condition to his military service.

The Board found that the in-service adenoidectomy did not result in current residuals, and thus denied a compensable disability rating.

The Board finds no current stomach disability and the veteran's complaints are not related to service. Service connection for this condition is denied.

The Board previously granted an increased rating for the veteran's residuals of a compression fracture of the body of C5 from 20 to 30 percent, but denied a higher evaluation. The case is being remanded due to the need for additional development including obtaining VA treatment records and conducting another VA examination.

The Board has remanded the case to the VBA AMC for further development, including obtaining additional medical evidence and arranging for a psychiatric examination. The veteran is required to provide any relevant private healthcare providers' names and contact information.

The Board has determined that the veteran's preexisting myasthenia gravis was aggravated during her military service, and thus, she is entitled to service connection for this condition.

The Board has determined that reinstatement of death pension benefits is legally precluded due to the lack of a provision in the law for such reinstatement. The RO was proper in terminating death pension benefits, and it followed the proper procedures.

The Board denied service connection for nicotine dependence, a lung disorder due to tobacco use in service, and left foot and low back disorders. The claim for residuals of a laceration of the left leg was also denied.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has not been presented to reopen the claim for service connection for degenerative joint disease of the right knee, as the additional evidence does not bear directly on the issue.

The Board found no evidence of a left eye disability related to service and denied the claim.

The veteran's claim for an increased rating for his dental trauma is being remanded due to the need for additional information from a VA dentist regarding specific teeth missing and their replacement status.

The Board has determined that there is a reasonable doubt in favor of the veteran's claim for service connection for arrhythmia as secondary to his service-connected PTSD, and thus grants this claim.

The RO has granted service connection for the veteran's residuals of fracture of the fifth proximal metacarpal right hand at a noncompensable (0 percent) disability rating, effective from January 2000. The appellant is seeking an increased disability rating and wishes to have his condition evaluated due to its significant worsening since his last VA examination.

The veteran's skin disorder was not incurred in or aggravated during active service and is not presumed to be related to herbicide exposure. The Board denied the claim for service connection.