Other conditions decisions — 2007

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining medical records and providing proper VCAA notice.

The veteran's combined service-connected disability evaluation is 20 percent, which does not meet the criteria for additional compensation for dependents.

The Board has reopened the appellant's claim for service connection for the cause of her husband's death, but finds that there is no evidence to support a finding that his multiple myeloma was related to his in-service exposure to asbestos and benzene. As such, the veteran's death cannot be attributed to any service-connected disability.

The Board has determined that further development is necessary for the veteran's claims, including obtaining medical opinions regarding service connection and increased evaluation.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for an initial compensable rating for left hallux rigidus of the left great toe and service connection for a right foot condition, secondary to his service-connected disabilities. The claim for increased rating for fracture, left tibia with one inch shortening of the left leg, DJD of the left knee, with associated ossification of the interosseus ligament is also denied.

The Board has determined that the grant of service connection for adenocarcinoma of the prostate and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma was clearly erroneous due to a lack of exposure to herbicides in Vietnam. As such, the claims are denied.

The veteran's service-connected residuals of excision, sarcoma, right arm and post radiation therapy are currently manifested by slight limitation of motion and tightness in the right upper extremity. The criteria for an evaluation in excess of 10 percent have not been met.

The Board found that the veteran's bilateral metatarsalgia does not more closely approximate the criteria for a rating in excess of 30 percent under any applicable diagnostic codes.

The Board has determined that the submitted evidence does not raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim for revocation of forfeiture of VA death benefits.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for a left eye condition and an initial compensable rating for degenerative changes to his left elbow. The veteran did not have a current left eye condition, and there was no objective evidence of limitation of motion in his left elbow.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for basic eligibility for VA benefits due to a lack of qualifying service as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army, including recognized guerrillas, in the service of the United States Armed Forces.

The RO denied the appellant's application to reopen her claim for service connection for the cause of the veteran's death, finding that no new and material evidence had been received.

The veteran's compensation benefits were reduced due to the loss of eligibility for a dependent spouse. The VA is now remanding the case for further development regarding his marital and dependent status during the relevant period.

The Board has determined that the veteran's dental problems are not as a result of trauma in service and have denied his claim for service connection for dental disability for compensation purposes.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an initial compensable rating for mild restrictive pulmonary disease and a pleural disorder due to exposure to asbestos, finding that clinical findings have not shown that he met the criteria for such a rating.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for VA death benefits as her late husband did not have qualifying service in the United States Armed Forces, thus she is not eligible for these benefits.

The veteran is seeking payment or reimbursement for unauthorized private hospitalization expenses after March 3, 2002. The Board has determined that additional development is required to determine if the veteran could have been safely discharged from the private facility as of March 4, 2002.

The veteran's claim for educational assistance benefits under Chapter 30, Title 38, United States Code is denied as her service did not meet the basic eligibility requirements due to a discharge other than honorable.

The veteran's claim for payment of VA benefits at the full-dollar rate is denied as he did not meet the residency requirements under applicable law and regulations.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development due to new evidence submitted by the veteran and incomplete notification requirements.