Other conditions decisions — 2006

The Board has determined that the veteran's current disability, T12 myelopathy with bowel and bladder paralysis due to intervertebral disc syndrome, is not related to service. The preponderance of evidence does not support a finding that his disability was incurred or aggravated during active duty.

The Board found that the veteran's service-connected postoperative residuals of a ruptured patellar tendon of the left knee warranted a 20 percent rating, which is the maximum schedular evaluation available under Diagnostic Code 5261 for limitation of extension. The condition does not meet criteria for higher ratings due to limitations in flexion or instability.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for proper VCAA notice and additional development of his claim, including a travel board hearing at the New York RO.

The Board has determined that the veteran's cardiovascular disease is not related to service and therefore denied his claim for service connection.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for increased evaluations for lateral instability and limitation of extension due to his knee disability, finding that the evidence does not warrant a higher rating under the applicable VA rating criteria.

The veteran's appeal is about his current rating for a service-connected psychophysiological cardiovascular reaction with aortic stenosis. The case has been remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining updated medical records and providing an examination that addresses the impact of his service-connected disability on his employability.

The Board denied a higher initial evaluation for the veteran's right knee disability, finding that there was no objective evidence of motion limitation or instability to warrant an increased rating.

The Board has determined that the submitted evidence does not raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claims for service connection for gout and a disability manifested by leg and groin pain.

The veteran seeks service connection for a cardiovascular disability, which he claims had its onset during his time in service. The case is remanded to obtain a VA nexus opinion regarding the relationship between current diagnoses of ischemic heart disease, coronary artery disease, and angina pectoris and any incident of service.

The Board finds that the appellant is not entitled to special monthly pension based on the need for regular aid and attendance, as she can care for herself without requiring the regular aid of another person.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for non-service connected death pension benefits as her income exceeded the maximum annual limit allowed by law.

The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected mood disorder, currently rated at 30 percent, does not warrant a higher rating as his symptoms do not meet or approximate the criteria for a higher evaluation.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development and readjudication due to recent judicial developments regarding the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000.

The Board has denied the veteran's request to reopen his claim for service connection for a left leg disorder due to lack of new and material evidence.

The VA denied an increased evaluation for the veteran's chronic urticaria with angioneurotic edema, currently rated at 10 percent. The evidence did not meet the criteria for a higher rating under any applicable diagnostic codes.

The Board found that the relationship between the veteran and J. A., who were legally divorced in April 1999, did not qualify as a common law marriage for VA pension benefits purposes.

The Board has determined that the veteran's optic atrophy is a congenital defect and not service-connected.

The veteran's cause of death was not service-connected, and there is no legal basis for accrued benefits or non-service-connected death pension.

The veteran's claim for an increased rating for his service-connected myopericarditis is being remanded due to the need for additional development of evidence, including obtaining relevant treatment records and scheduling a VA examination.

The veteran's application for VA health care benefits was denied because he is in Priority Group 8, which does not qualify him for enrollment as of January 17, 2003.