Other conditions decisions — 2011

The Board has determined that the appellant's discharge from service was under other than honorable conditions due to willful acceptance of an undesirable discharge and willful and persistent misconduct. As a result, his character of discharge is considered a bar to VA benefits.

The Veteran's left leg disorder is presumed to have existed prior to service, and the Board finds that it was not aggravated by military service. The case is remanded for further examination and development.

The Board has remanded the case due to a scheduling error for a Travel Board hearing. The Veteran's claim of reopening his defective vision service connection is still pending and will be addressed after the hearing.

The Veteran's post-operative neuritis, sural nerve, left foot is characterized by pain and decreased sensation on the lateral side of the left foot. The Board finds that a 10 percent evaluation is appropriate.

The Board has granted the Veteran's claim of service connection for bilateral pes cavus, hallux valgus, and other foot deformities, to include as secondary to service connected tinea pedis. The new evidence received since the July 1994 RO rating decision is considered material and sufficient to reopen the claim.

The Board found that there is no evidence to support the Veteran's claim of additional disability due to VA care, and thus denied his claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151.

The Board has determined that the appellant does not have service as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army, including the recognized guerrillas, in the service of the United States Armed Forces. Therefore, they do not meet the basic eligibility requirements for VA benefits and their claim is denied.

The Veteran seeks service connection for muscle spasms of the bilateral posterior upper legs and bilateral leg cramping. The Board has determined that additional development is needed to determine if these conditions are related to his period of active service, including a claimed in-service incident at Fort Dix, New Jersey.

The Board found that VA legally garnished $27,664 in VA disability compensation payments from February 1, 1992 to March 1, 1997 based on a state court order. However, the Veteran's entitlement to VA disability compensation benefits during the period from March 1, 1997 through July 2002 was denied as there is no legal basis for such benefits.

The Board denied increased ratings for service-connected residuals of shell fragment wounds of the right arm and neck, finding that the conditions were static with no new symptoms or complications.

The Veteran's request for a waiver of overpayment was denied because it was not submitted within the required 180-day period after notification of the overpayment.

The Veteran's left shoulder disorder is manifested by shoulder pain, weakness, and slight limitation of motion. The Board found that the disability does not meet or approximate criteria for a rating in excess of 20 percent.

The Board found that the termination of the appellant's VA death pension benefits based on excessive income, effective December 1, 2008, was proper and denied her appeal.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's cardiac disorder, to include hypertensive vascular disease, is not proximately due to or a result of his service-connected disability (diabetes mellitus and PTSD).

The Veteran's claim for service connection for a dental disability, including gingivitis and periodontitis, is denied as he does not have tooth loss resulting from trauma or disease (such as osteomyelitis) due to military service. He has only been diagnosed with advanced localized periodontitis.

The Veteran's service-connected keloids and pruritus on chest, upper back, arms, and flank have been manifested by raised keloids affecting less than 5 percent of the entire body; and by pruritus affecting greater than 5 percent but less than 20 percent of the entire body. The disability does not meet the criteria for a higher rating under VA's Rating Schedule.

The Board found that the Veteran does not have any musculoskeletal disorder related to his service and denied his claim for service connection.

The Veteran's chronic eye disability was not caused by VA carelessness, negligence, or similar fault during his 1973 knee surgery and is therefore not entitled to compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151.

The Veteran is entitled to continued special monthly pension benefits based on the need for aid and attendance of another person due to his non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

The Board has decided to remand the case for additional development of medical records and authorization for release of private medical records.