Other conditions decisions — 2010

The Board has determined that the evidence submitted since the November 2002 rating decision is not new and material, and thus does not provide a basis to reopen the claim for service connection for restless leg syndrome as secondary to the service-connected low back disability.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for colon cancer is denied. The claims for higher evaluations for coronary artery disease, multiple metatarsal head resections of the left foot, and diabetes mellitus are remanded due to insufficient evidence.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's residuals of cellulitis do not warrant a rating in excess of 10 percent, as there is no evidence of underlying soft tissue damage or limitation of motion.

The Veteran's gout has not been productive of a definite impairment of health objectively supported by examination findings or incapacitating exacerbations occurring three or more times a year, as required for an evaluation in excess of 20 percent.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to his failure to report for a scheduled VA examination, and the need to attempt an examination at the prison facility. The RO will readjudicate the claim after obtaining the necessary medical evidence.

The Board has determined that recovery of the overpayment of VA disability compensation benefits in the amount of $10,299.60 would not be against equity and good conscience due to the Veteran's partial fault in creating the debt and the VA's partial fault as well.

The Veteran's claim for an increased evaluation for his service-connected right sacroiliitis prior to November 28, 2007 was denied. The Board found that the evidence did not meet the criteria for a higher rating.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded to obtain additional medical records and for a VA examination at the Lyons VAMC. The claims include seeking increased ratings for his service-connected left tibia fracture, as well as secondary service connection for right leg and foot conditions.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current bilateral eye disability, including dry eye syndrome, is related to his in-service photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) surgery and has granted service connection for this condition.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development of the record, including securing VA and private treatment records, obtaining copies of SSA decision and medical records, arranging for a PTSD examination, and arranging for an examination to determine the likely etiology of his squamous cell carcinoma.

The Veteran's military service does not meet the threshold eligibility requirements for nonservice-connected pension benefits.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for a dental disability is being remanded due to the need for proper notice and additional evidence.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed for both the 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 claim and the service connection reopening request due to notification issues and need for further examination.

The Veteran's death is being reviewed to determine if a contaminated blood transfusion on January 9, 2008, at VA medical facility contributed to his death. The case is remanded for further review by a specialist in hematology.

The Veteran's case is being remanded due to a scheduling conflict for his travel board hearing. The appeal will be reconsidered after the hearing.

The Veteran seeks service connection for throat cancer and residuals. The Board has decided to remand the case for additional development, including obtaining medical records and scheduling a VA examination.

The Veteran's appeal for a higher rating for gout of the right great toe was denied by the Board, as the evidence did not show an exceptional or unusual disability picture that would render impractical the application of the regular schedular rating standards.

The Board found that the right below-the-knee amputation was not caused by VA's carelessness, negligence, or error in judgment. The Veteran received appropriate treatment and informed consent for the procedure.

The Board has received a withdrawal of the appeal from the appellant, and thus the case is dismissed.

The appeal is being remanded for further development, including scheduling a hearing before the Board and considering the new evidence submitted by the Veteran.