Other conditions decisions — 2006

The veteran's duodenal ulcer is no more than mild in degree and does not meet the criteria for a higher initial rating.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for basic legal entitlement to VA benefits due to a lack of recognized service in the U.S. Armed Forces, as determined by the National Personnel Records Center.

The Board has remanded the case for proper VCAA notice and further development of the evidence.

The Board finds that the veteran's current back disability is related to a service injury, and grants service connection for a back injury.

The Board has granted the appellant's reinstatement of death pension benefits due to her income being below the maximum allowable rate. The claim for service connection for the cause of the veteran's death is denied as there is no competent evidence indicating any possible relationship between the cause of death and his military service.

The veteran is seeking compensation for an eye condition resulting from a left eye cataract extraction performed by VA. The Board has determined that additional development is needed to determine if the posterior capsule of the lens ruptured during the surgery, causing the veteran's complaints of impaired vision.

The VA denied a rating in excess of 30 percent for the veteran's service-connected disability, which is characterized by residual muscle wounds with some subjective fatigue and weakness but no muscle atrophy.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for thrombocytopenia, claimed as myeloproliferative syndrome, finding that there was no evidence of a disease during service or at any time thereafter. The veteran's current condition is not recognized as one of the chronic diseases for which presumptive service connection can be granted.

The veteran is seeking an increased evaluation for his service-connected right hand injury, currently rated at 10 percent. The case has been remanded to consider new rating criteria and potential changes in the evaluation of skin disorders and impairment of digits.

The Board found that the veteran's skin and lung conditions did not develop as a result of his service, including exposure to ionizing radiation. The evidence did not support a finding that these conditions were related to his service.

The Board found that the veteran's lung cancer is not related to in-service asbestos exposure and denied his claim for service connection.

The Board has reopened the claim and determined that new evidence supports a finding of service connection for a neurological disability.

The Board found that the veteran did not sustain dental trauma in service and denied his claim for service connection.

The veteran's claims for earlier effective dates for service connection and TDIU are being remanded due to the need to address a potential CUE in an RO rating decision from May 1974.

The veteran's claim for an effective date prior to January 17, 2001 for service connection of his left knee disability was denied as the evidence did not show that the condition arose before this date.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim of service connection for residuals of a chest injury and granted it. The issue of whether new and material evidence was submitted to reopen the claim is also resolved in favor of the veteran.

The veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for a 10% rating for his right fifth toe disability is denied as there was no factually ascertainable increase in the condition within one year prior to his January 2001 claim. The veteran's CUE claim regarding the December 1998 noncompensable rating decision is also denied.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for recognition as the surviving spouse of the veteran due to a valid divorce judgment entered in May 1969, which rendered her ineligible for VA benefits.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for nonservice-connected VA burial benefits because it was not received within two years after the veteran's death and burial, and the appellant did not provide evidence of having paid the funeral expenses.

The Board has determined that the appellant's husband had a dishonorable discharge from military service, which bars him from VA benefits. As such, the claim for VA death pension and DIC benefits is denied.