Other conditions decisions — 2006

The VA has denied an increased evaluation for the veteran's service-connected post-operative residuals of left posterior tibialis dysfunction, currently rated at 20 percent.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for a compensable evaluation for Hodgkin's disease and an initial compensable evaluation for endarterectomy, right carotid artery. The veteran's inactive Hodgkin's disease currently warrants no more than the noncompensable rating assigned.

The Board has remanded the case for further development and consideration of the veteran's claim for an extraschedular evaluation under 38 C.F.R. § 3.321(b)(1) for residuals of a gunshot wound to the left thigh.

The Board has denied the veteran's claim for service connection for a right hip disorder, to include arthritis, as there is no evidence that his current condition is related to his military service.

The Board has determined that the veteran's residuals of grenade fragment wound to Muscle Group III do not warrant a rating in excess of 20 percent.

The Board denied the claim for service connection for the cause of the veteran's death due to bronchiogenic cancer, finding that it was not incurred or aggravated by active service.

The Board has determined that the October 1957 and November 1962 rating decisions, which reduced and continued the veteran's polio residuals rating to 50 percent, were based on clear and unmistakable error (CUE). As a result, the total schedular evaluation for the veteran's service-connected residuals of poliomyelitis is reinstated.

The Board denied the veteran's daughter's request for an extension of her delimiting date for Chapter 35 educational assistance, finding that she did not suspend her education due to conditions beyond her control and thus did not meet the legal criteria for such an extension.

The Board denied the appellant's request to reopen her claim for revocation of forfeiture of VA benefits, finding that no new and material evidence had been submitted.

The Board has determined that the appellant does not have qualifying military service and therefore, is not a veteran for VA benefits purposes. The claim is denied.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for a delimiting date beyond August 4, 2003, for VA educational assistance under Chapter 30, Title 38, United States Code, finding that no new and material evidence had been submitted to reopen the final decision.

The veteran's lung disease and pleura are being remanded for further evaluation due to the need for a VA examination.

The Board has determined that the appellant's spouse does not qualify as a veteran for VA benefits, and thus her claim of entitlement to VA benefits as his widow is denied.

The Board determined that the appellant's character of discharge from September 1975 does not constitute a bar to VA benefits, and his entire service period is considered as one continuous period. The December 1981 decision was found to be erroneous due to misinterpretation of AWOL periods.

The Board found that the evidence submitted did not relate to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claim and thus, it is not new and material. As a result, the appellant's claim for basic eligibility for VA pension benefits was denied.

The Board has determined that the claim to reopen is not yet properly adjudicated due to procedural defects and will be remanded for further action.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded to the RO for further examination and development of his claim due to inadequate previous examinations and treatment records. The case will be reviewed again after these steps are taken.

The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected right humerus fracture resulted in some foreshortening and residual deformity, which more nearly approximates malunion with moderate deformity. The veteran is therefore entitled to a 20 percent rating for his condition.

The VA determined that the veteran's service-connected acquired deformity of ninth dorsal vertebra warrants a 20 percent evaluation, which is the maximum available under current rating criteria.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded due to his request for a video-conference hearing before the Board of Veterans' Appeals.