Other conditions decisions — 2012

The case is being remanded for further development, including a TBI examination and consideration of separate ratings for residuals.

The Veteran's spouse, the appellant, was not recognized as a surviving spouse for purposes of VA death pension benefits due to separation from the Veteran without fault on her part.

The Veteran's service-connected traumatic aphakia of the right eye, corneal sclera laceration is currently rated at 30 percent and does not meet the criteria for a higher rating.

The Veteran's gynecomastia disability is rated as 0 percent disabling under Diagnostic Code 7628, and the Board denied an increased rating greater than 0 percent.

The Veteran's right hand disability has been characterized by pain when gripping objects with some flare-up pain; full movement of the fingers and thumb were observed upon examination, but ankylosis of any digit has not been shown. The criteria for a rating in excess of 20 percent have not been met.

The Veteran's appeal for an increased rating for bilateral conjunctivitis has been dismissed due to the death of the appellant.

The Board found that the Veteran's currently diagnosed respiratory disorder is not related to service, including as secondary to asbestos exposure. Therefore, the claim for service connection was denied.

The Veteran is a Vietnam veteran and the appellant, who was born with spina bifida, meets the criteria for benefits under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1805.

The Board found that the Veteran's current acquired respiratory disability was not incurred in or aggravated by his active military service and denied his claim.

The Veteran's right great toe bunion has been evaluated as noncompensable (0%) under the VA rating schedule. The disability is characterized by pain or tenderness, especially when wearing tight shoes, but does not meet the criteria for a compensable rating.

The Board has decided to remand the apportionment claim for further development and consideration, including obtaining additional information from both parties regarding financial matters and dates of incarceration.

The Board found that the Veteran's tardive dyskinesia and muscle spasms were not caused by VA treatment, but rather resulted from his pre-existing schizophrenia.

The Board has determined that the appellant is not entitled to recognition as the surviving spouse of the Veteran for VA benefit purposes due to her having been legally divorced from the Veteran at the time of his death.

The Veteran's claim for an increased evaluation for her service-connected right patellar tendonitis is being remanded due to the need for a more contemporaneous VA examination.

The Veteran is seeking compensation under the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. � 1151 for nerve damage and chin atrophy claimed as due to wisdom teeth extraction and bone extraction surgery. The Board has determined that a VA examination is necessary to determine if any current nerve damage was caused by the December 20, 2007 dental surgery or post-operative care.

The Veteran's claim for waiver of overpayment was denied due to a failure to file the application within 180 days. However, new evidence has been submitted suggesting that the Veteran did not receive timely notification and thus may have filed the application in a timely manner.

The Board has remanded the case due to errors in VCAA notice and incomplete development. The Veteran's claim for service connection on a direct basis is being reconsidered.

The Veteran died of a malignant glomus tumor, which is presumed to have been caused by his exposure to herbicides in service. The Board finds that the evidence supports this presumption and grants service connection for the cause of death.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for a condition of the lungs and breathing, other than calcification of the lungs is remanded due to insufficient development. The VA will schedule an examination and request additional medical records.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for further development regarding the validity of the overpayment and whether a waiver of recovery is warranted.