Other conditions decisions — 2008

The Board has granted an earlier effective date of February 28, 2001 for a 30 percent disability rating for the residuals of a shell fragment wound of the left thigh.

The Board denied the appellant's application to reopen her claim for VA death benefits, finding that no new and material evidence had been presented. The claim was previously denied in January 2002 due to a lack of qualifying service.

The Board has determined that there is no current diagnosis of a right elbow disability and thus, service connection cannot be established.

The veteran's claim for an increased evaluation for residuals of flashburns of the eyes is being remanded due to inadequate notice and need for further development, including a VA eye examination.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for a new VA examination to assess the current severity of his service-connected metatarsophalangeal joint arthritis of the left great toe, including any residual disabilities involving the left ankle. The case will then be readjudicated.

The Board denied the appellant's request to reopen his claim for legal entitlement to VA benefits, finding that no new and material evidence had been submitted.

The Board found that the veteran's current bilateral defective hearing was not incurred or aggravated by military service and denied his claim.

The veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for VA disability pension benefits is denied. The claim for additional VA disability pension benefits payable from August 2004 through December 2004 is also denied.

The Board has remanded the case due to issues related to whether new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen a claim for apportionment of the veteran's compensation benefits for his ex-spouse. The appeal is not about service connection.

The Board found that the appellant did not submit new and material evidence to reopen her claim for death benefits due to forfeiture, as she had held herself out as married to a second person since 1947. The claim remains final.

The veteran is seeking service connection for spondylolisthesis, which he claims was aggravated by his active duty service. The Board has ordered a VA examination to determine the etiology of the condition and whether it was permanently aggravated during service.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete records and need for additional medical opinions regarding service connection.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for a new VA examination to assess his current level of impairment from his service-connected reflux esophagitis.

The veteran's claim for educational assistance benefits for on-the-job training from October 2003 to April 2004 was denied as he submitted his signed application more than one year after the training began.

The Board found no clear and unmistakable error in the September 1975 rating decisions regarding the veteran's shell fragment wounds, as there was no indication that the facts were incorrect or the law and regulation were incorrectly applied.

The VA has determined that the veteran does not have any additional disabilities, including residuals of a fractured nose, teeth injury, or bladder removal, due to multiple surgeries performed at a VAMC in 2003. The evidence does not support the claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151.

The Board has denied the veteran's appeals for payment or reimbursement of private medical expenses due to a lack of timely claims.

The veteran's appeal is remanded for a new VA examination to assess the current severity of his service-connected pylorospasm and for additional outpatient treatment records to be obtained.

The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected regional enteritis with granulomatous colitis did not cause or contribute to his death from non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Therefore, service connection for the cause of the veteran's death is denied.

The veteran seeks reimbursement for medical expenses incurred at a non-VA hospital due to emergency treatment. The VA is remanding the case to obtain additional evidence regarding whether prior authorization was provided by VA.