Other conditions decisions — 2011

Your claim for TDIU has been granted and effective from the date of your original claim, December 7, 2005.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's left hip disability, which pre-existed service and was aggravated by service, is entitled to service connection.

The Board denied service connection for a spine disability as secondary to service-connected varicose veins of the left lower extremity, and also denied an increased rating for varicose veins. The Veteran's claim was not reopened due to lack of new and material evidence.

The Board found that the Veteran's rib mass is not related to her military service and denied her claim for service connection.

The Veteran's claims for initial compensable ratings for his service-connected peripheral vascular disease of the lower extremities and for service connection for a low back disorder are being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining medical records and scheduling VA examinations.

The Board has decided to remand the case for additional development, including obtaining medical records and verifying the Veteran's duty status during periods of active duty for training (ACDUTRA) or inactive duty for training (INACDUTRA). The Veteran is also required to undergo a VA examination to determine if his current nasal disability is related to service.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for a Supplemental Statement of the Case after receiving additional evidence, including VA outpatient treatment records and Social Security Administration records.

The Board found that a reduction from 30% to 10% for the Veteran's left upper quadrant abdominal pain with small tender mass was proper, but a further reduction to 0% was not supported by evidence. The current rating of 10% is granted effective September 1, 2007.

The Veteran's death is being reviewed for Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) under the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 due to VA hospitalization or medical/surgical treatment in March and April of 2007. The appeal has been remanded as requested by the appellant.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to determine if the Veteran currently has a respiratory disorder and whether it is related to his military service, including any in-service asbestos exposure. The case will be remanded for this purpose.

The Veteran's marriage to the appellant was not legally terminated, and therefore, the appellant is not considered his surviving spouse for VA benefits purposes.

The appeal has been dismissed due to the Veteran's death.

The Board has remanded the case for scheduling a Travel Board hearing at the RO level.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for additional development, including obtaining records from Miriam Hospital and determining whether the appellant's claim may be granted.

The Board found that the Veteran did not have a disability manifested by hematuria incurred during service or due to herbicide exposure. The cause of death was determined to be acute myocardial infarction, chronic obstructive lung disease, pulmonary emphysema, and pulmonary tuberculosis, with post-transurethral resection of the prostate as a significant condition contributing to his death.

The Veteran requested an earlier effective date for additional compensation benefits due to dependents, but the Board found that he did not submit claims prior to January 10, 2009.

The Veteran's claim for a higher rating for bursitis of the right elbow is being remanded due to the need for additional examination and development. The matter will be adjudicated again after all requested actions have been completed.

The Veteran's overpayment of $1,340 for additional compensation benefits for his former spouse S.B. is valid due to the failure to report his divorce and remarriage in a timely manner. The debt will be reduced accordingly.

The Board has remanded the case for a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran's claimed memory loss, sleep disturbances, and any other neuropsychological signs or symptoms. The appeal is now pending again.

The case is being remanded for the agency of original jurisdiction to obtain a folder from a previous home loan guaranty decision and determine if there was a previous determination as to the character of the appellant's discharge. The claim will then be readjudicated.