Other conditions decisions — 2012

The Board has reopened the Veteran's claim for service connection of arthritis of the knees due to new and material evidence received since the May 1959 rating decision. The Board also finds that it is as likely as not that the Veteran's current bilateral knee condition is related to his period of military service.

The appellant is appealing the denial of a Post 9/11 GI Bill benefit level higher than 60 percent. He disputes the accuracy of his service dates and requests that his claimed dates be verified to include an updated DD 214, flight records, and unit reports.

The Veteran's overpayment of $185,641.00 was waived due to the lack of fault on his part and in equity and good conscience, as he did not know about the outstanding warrant.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded for a VA examination to determine the current level of impairment due to his service-connected deep vein thrombosis of the left lower extremity, and for consideration of entitlement to TDIU.

The Board determined that the appellant's other-than-honorable (OTH) discharge from service constituted a bar to the payment of VA benefits, including in the form of entitlement to service connection for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

The Board found that the Veteran's right eye disorder, diagnosed as an epiretinal membrane, is not related to service or any service-connected disability. The claim for secondary service connection was also denied.

The Board found no current diagnosis of residuals of a groin injury and concluded that the Veteran's current groin pain is not related to his service, including his in-service motor vehicle accident. As such, service connection for residuals of a groin injury was denied.

The Veteran's neurocardiogenic syncope and subsequent pacemaker implant have been rated, but the current evaluations do not meet the criteria for higher ratings based on his symptoms.

The Veteran withdrew her appeal regarding the issue of entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for hydronephrosis with left upper heminephrectomy.

The Veteran does not have a skin condition, to include tumors and cysts, that is related to his service, including as secondary to exposure to chemical dioxins.

The Board has remanded the case due to a failure to obtain service personnel records, and the Veteran's claim for service connection for aortic stenosis is pending.

The Board has remanded the case for further development due to inconsistencies in medical opinions and need for additional examination.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's left elbow disorder was not incurred or aggravated by active service, and therefore denied his claim for service connection.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current lung disability, including residuals of a lobectomy performed in April 2002, is not due to or aggravated by service.

The Board has determined that the appellant did not have recognized service as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army, including the recognized guerrillas, in the service of the United States Armed Forces. Therefore, he is ineligible for one-time payment from the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded to obtain additional VA treatment records and to schedule him for a VA examination to determine the nature, extent, onset, and etiology of his bilateral numbness of the lower legs. Additionally, he will be scheduled for another VA examination to assess the severity of his left ear hearing loss.

The Board has granted service connection for right vocal cord paralysis and assigned an initial 10 percent disability rating.

The Veteran's necrotizing fasciitis was not caused by VA carelessness, negligence, or fault. The psychiatric disability claim is denied due to lack of credible evidence of an in-service event.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's preexisting duodenal ulcer was aggravated by his military service, and therefore grants service connection for this condition.

The Veteran's service-connected residuals of a shrapnel wound of the left arm are rated at 10 percent, and his scar from that injury is not compensable. The Board denied these claims as there was no evidence to support higher ratings based on the current state of the disability.