Other conditions decisions — 2013

The Board found new and material evidence to reopen the claim for service connection of a right hip disorder secondary to a service-connected right knee disability, but did not reach a decision on whether service connection should be granted.

The Board has remanded the case due to issues related to the validity of the overpayment debt and its calculation, as well as the status of the Veteran's stepchildren.

The Veteran's additional disability, including pain, weakness, and loss of muscle in the left lower extremity, is not considered to be caused by VA care, treatment, or examination. The Board finds that there is no evidence supporting a finding of negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment, or similar instance of fault on the part of VA.

The Veteran's left ear tympanic membrane perforation was caused by a VA procedure performed without informed consent, meeting the criteria for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for a one-time payment from the FVEC Fund due to lack of qualifying service as per the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) certification.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded to schedule a Travel Board hearing due to his request. The effective date issue remains pending and will be addressed in the future.

The Veteran's claim for a rating in excess of 10 percent for his service-connected ilio-inguinal nerve condition has been denied as the maximum schedular rating is already assigned.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have a chronic eating disorder or sleeping disorder, and therefore service connection for these conditions is denied.

The Veteran's service-connected right inguinal hernia residuals did not meet the criteria for a compensable rating from October 6, 2010.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining VA and private medical records, conducting a new examination to determine if the Veteran experiences memory loss due to service or undiagnosed illness, and readjudicating the claim.

The Veteran's current respiratory disorder is not shown to be related to his military service, including his inservice treatment for pneumonia. The Board finds that the preponderance of the evidence does not support a finding in favor of service connection.

The Board has determined that there is no evidence to support a finding of a current bilateral eye disability related to service, and thus the claim for service connection for a bilateral eye disability is denied.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for esophageal cancer and TDIU due to lack of evidence linking his current condition to military service, specifically radiation exposure.

The Veteran's service connection claim for carcinoma of the stomach was denied as there were no in-service manifestations or chronic symptoms post-service, and the condition is not presumed to be related to herbicide exposure.

The Board has determined that the appellant does not meet the legal requirements for obtaining a one-time payment from the FVEC Fund due to lack of qualifying active service as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army, including in recognized guerrillas, in the service of the United States Armed Forces.

The Veteran's claim to reopen the service connection for Crohn's disease was denied due to lack of new and material evidence. The issue of an initial rating in excess of 70 percent for PTSD remains pending.

The Board has remanded the case due to inextricably intertwined issues and new evidence submitted by the appellant. The claims for service connection are pending.

The Board has determined that further development is required before deciding the Veteran's claim, including obtaining service personnel records and any outstanding medical records. The case will be remanded for these actions.

The Board denied the claimant's requests for a one-time payment from the FVEC Fund and VA death benefits due to lack of qualifying service in the United States Armed Forces.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for a one-time payment from the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund as he did not have service with the United States Armed Forces, and thus is ineligible.