Other conditions decisions — 2009

The Board has determined that the appellant's deceased spouse did not have qualifying service as a Veteran, and therefore, she is not eligible for VA benefits.

The Veteran's service-connected conjunctivitis is not currently manifested by active symptoms or identifiable residuals, and thus does not warrant a compensable rating.

The Veteran's right foot drop is determined to be the result of his October 13, 2000, laminectomy at the Baltimore VA Medical Center. The Board finds that this additional disability was not caused by a lack of skill, carelessness, negligence, error in judgment or an unforeseen event.

The Veteran's claim for an increased evaluation in excess of 40 percent for L4-5 spondylolisthesis with degenerative herniated disc and facet disease was denied. The Veteran is also not entitled to a TDIU from October 3, 2006.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for restoration of DIC benefits due to her failure to meet the requirements set by a law amendment effective January 1, 2004. The appellant was not eligible for restoration as she did not submit her application before December 16, 2004.

The Veteran's pleural fibrosis is not considered service-connected due to lack of evidence linking the condition to his military service.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have a current lung condition related to service exposure to asbestos, and thus denied his claim for service connection.

The Board has determined that the appellant is not eligible for Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) benefits as the surviving spouse of a Veteran due to her remarriage after age 57, which precludes her from receiving such benefits.

The Veteran's claim for an increased evaluation of his pituitary microadenoma was denied as the evidence did not meet the criteria for a higher rating under Diagnostic Code 7903 due to lack of specific symptoms such as muscular weakness, mental disturbance, weight gain, cold intolerance, cardiovascular involvement, bradycardia (less than 60 beats per minute), and sleepiness.

The Veteran seeks service connection for atypical chest pains with ectopic palpitations, including as an undiagnosed illness related to her service in the southwest Asia theater of operations. The case is remanded due to outstanding private medical records and a need for additional VA examination.

The Veteran's claim for a temporary total rating based on convalescence following surgery in August 2004 was denied because the claim was received more than one year after the need for convalescence began.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's service-connected Reynaud's disease contributed substantially and materially to his fatal arrhythmia, which was the cause of death. Therefore, service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death is granted.

The Board has determined that the appellant's income exceeds the maximum annual pension rate, and therefore, death pension benefits are denied. The claim of service connection for the cause of death due to exposure to herbicides is remanded.

The appellant is seeking basic eligibility for VA death benefits based on her husband's service. The case has been remanded due to the need for further review of the decedent's claimed active service in the U.S. Armed Forces during World War II.

The Veteran's service is not considered wartime service, and therefore he does not meet the eligibility requirements for non-service connected pension benefits.

The Veteran's additional disability of osteomyelitis with T9 paraspinal abscess is not deemed to be caused by VA gallbladder surgery or follow-up care, and thus his claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 is denied.

The Veteran's appeal is denied as he is not entitled to payment of interest on retroactive disability compensation associated with a grant of benefits based on clear and unmistakable error (CUE) in a November 1979 rating decision.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development and consideration of the new evidence submitted after the last Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC). The case will be reconsidered with the new evidence, and a Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC) will be issued.

The Board has remanded the case for further development and readjudication due to inconsistencies in medical expense reports submitted by the appellant.

The Board found that the Veteran's dependent spouse was properly removed from his compensation award effective February 1, 2000. The decision is denied as a matter of law due to the absence of legal merit.