Other conditions decisions — 2006

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have a current right hip or leg disability and therefore cannot establish service connection for these conditions.

The veteran's overpayment of disability compensation benefits is being remanded for further development to determine if the debt was properly created and assessed against her, including considering whether it resulted solely from administrative error by VA.

The March 2000 rating decision that assigned an effective date of August 12, 1998 for the grant of entitlement to a total disability evaluation for compensation based on individual unemployability was supported by the evidence then of record and consistent with applicable law and regulations.

The Board denied service connection for cause of the veteran's death, finding no competent evidence that the veteran's service-connected disabilities contributed to his death.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for basic eligibility to VA benefits based on her husband's alleged service, finding that there was no verification from an appropriate service department demonstrating his service as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army.

The Board found that the veteran did not have neurosyphilis, which he claimed as nerve damage to his upper and lower extremities. The evidence showed no connection between the current condition and service.

The veteran's claim for nonservice-connected disability pension was denied because his active duty service did not include a tour in the Republic of Vietnam, making him ineligible for the benefit.

The appellant is seeking recognition as the veteran's surviving spouse for VA death benefit purposes. The case has been remanded due to a request for a hearing.

The Board has determined that the submitted evidence does not raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim of service connection for a skin disorder to include chest rash, and thus the claim is denied.

The veteran is seeking an extraschedular evaluation for his service-connected gunshot wound to the left abdomen. The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate notice and development of evidence.

The veteran's disability compensation benefits were properly restored to a 70 percent rate, effective April 1, 2002.

The Board finds that the appellant's current disabilities, including paresis of the right lower extremity, impotence, and incontinence, are likely related to a motor vehicle accident during active duty training (ACDUTRA) in 1958. Therefore, service connection for residuals of a back injury is granted.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including compliance with VCAA requirements and additional development under VA's radiation claim procedures.

The veteran's appeal is remanded due to inadequate reasons and bases in the previous Board decision. The case must be returned for an examination during a flare-up of his skin condition, review of all pertinent records from Hines VAMC, and consideration of whether referral to the Under Secretary for Benefits or the Director, Compensation and Pension Service, for an extraschedular evaluation is warranted.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have post-traumatic stress disorder and therefore, service connection for this condition is denied.

The Board has granted service connection for the veteran's left hip degenerative process as secondary to his service-connected low back disorder.

The Board found no current medical evidence of any left leg or back injury, and denied the veteran's claims for service connection.

The Board has determined that the veteran's bilateral retinal detachment was incurred in service, and thus grants service connection for this condition.

The Board found that the veteran's claim for service connection for emphysema due to tobacco use in service is not barred by law and should be adjudicated under the laws and regulations in effect at the time of filing. The case was remanded for further development, including a VA examination.

The Board has determined that the submitted evidence is not new and material, thus preventing the reopening of the claim for service connection for residuals of a back injury.