Other conditions decisions — 2005

The veteran's VA compensation benefits are not to be apportioned on behalf of their minor child due to the veteran's reasonable contributions and the appellant's failure to provide evidence of hardship or non-payment of medical expenses.

The VA has determined that the veteran's status post resection of the proximal phalanx of the right foot second toe with mild metatarsalgia warrants a 10 percent evaluation, effective August 1, 2001.

The veteran's claim for an increased evaluation of post concussion syndrome is being remanded due to inadequate notification under the VCAA. Additionally, his notice of disagreement regarding service connection for depression secondary to post concussion syndrome is also being addressed.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for a rating in excess of 20 percent for splenectomy and a compensable rating for postoperative hernias, residuals of splenectomy. The claim for a compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss is remanded.

The veteran is seeking service connection for a disability manifested by bowel incontinence. The RO previously denied this claim, but the Board has determined that reopening of the claim is necessary due to the passage of time and the submission of new evidence.

The veteran is seeking service connection for lung disability, which he contends is due to asbestos exposure in service. The Board has ordered additional development including obtaining evidence of asbestos exposure and medical opinions.

The Board denied a compensable rating for the veteran's service-connected pterygium of the left eye, finding that his corrected visual acuity was no worse than 20/20 minus one.

The veteran's death benefits claim as the surviving spouse is denied because the appellant was not married to the veteran at the time of his death.

The case is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining the veteran's service personnel records and his application for VA education benefits. The veteran may submit any additional evidence he desires.

The Board is remanding the case to the RO for further development and readjudication, including compliance with VCAA requirements.

The claimant disagrees with the effective date of October 1, 2002, assigned for benefits granted under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1805 at Level III. The RO determined that this was the date of receipt by VA of his claim for an increase.

The veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of medical expenses incurred at private facilities was denied due to the untimely filing of the claim and the appellant's ineligibility under VA regulations.

The Board has denied the veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral retinal detachment. The case is being remanded to comply with the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000 (VCAA).

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim for service connection of a right hip disorder and found that new evidence supports this claim. The Board also determined that the current hip disorder is not related to active duty.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the veteran's diagnosis of spinal meningitis during service and the current residuals.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining medical records and determining if there is a nexus between the veteran's in-service eye injury and his current bilateral eye problems.

The Board has ordered a medical opinion to determine if exposure to poisons at the veteran's last radar site and non-ionizing radiation contributed to his death. The case will be remanded for further review.

The veteran's panic disorder with agoraphobia resulted in significant social and occupational impairment, warranting a rating of 50 percent from October 2, 1999 through September 30, 2001.

The Board has determined that the veteran did not timely appeal the denial of service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder, high frequency hearing loss, and total rating based on individual unemployability in October 1995. As a result, these claims are denied.

The Board found no evidence of a causal connection between the veteran's current low back disability and his military service, including an injury in service. The preponderance of the evidence does not show a nexus.