Other conditions decisions — 2015

The Board has determined that the appellant's dishonorable discharge from service constitutes a bar to VA benefits, and thus denied his claim.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to determine if the appellant's daughter, C. L., qualifies as a helpless child due to permanent incapacity for self-support prior to her 18th birthday.

The Board has ordered additional development to determine if the Veteran's death was caused by his service-connected cold injury residuals and subsequent surgeries, including a vascular surgery in July 2006.

The Board has ordered additional development to obtain inpatient medical records from various facilities where the Veteran was treated during her pregnancy and after, as well as records from Hahnemann University Hospital. The case will be remanded for further adjudication.

The Board found that the reduction of VA compensation benefits due to incarceration for a felony conviction was proper under applicable regulations, but denied the claim for additional retroactive compensation.

The Veteran's claims for increased rating and service connection were denied. The right tibia and fibula fracture with residuals are currently rated at 20%.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for increased evaluations for his right and left foot calluses, finding that they did not meet the criteria for a higher rating under Diagnostic Code 5284. The Veteran was granted separate 20 percent ratings for each foot.

The Board has determined that further development is needed to determine the Veteran's lung conditions and their relationship to his military service, including any asbestos exposure. The case will be remanded for additional examination and opinion.

The Board has found that new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the claim of service connection for a psychiatric disability. After resolving reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, it is determined that his schizoaffective disorder is related to service.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for a TDIU prior to November 28, 1990 due to his service-connected duodenal ulcer with hiatal hernia. The evidence did not show that he was unable to secure or follow substantially gainful employment solely due to his disability.

The Veteran's appeal for a clothing allowance was dismissed due to his death.

The Board dismissed the appeal because the appellant died during the pendency of the appeal.

The Board has remanded the case to consider whether a separate evaluation is warranted for any manifestations of the Veteran's service-connected status post fracture of the mandible, with temporomandibular joint dysfunction. The issue of entitlement to an extraschedular evaluation for this condition remains denied.

The Veteran's income was not excessive for the purpose of payment of VA special monthly pension benefits for the 2013 calendar year, and his claim is granted.

The Veteran's initial ratings for her service-connected right and left knee disabilities have been granted, with the right knee rated at 10 percent since May 25, 2010, and the left knee rated at 10 percent prior to June 11, 2014, and at 20 percent since that date. The Veteran's initial ratings are considered 'granted' as her appeal for higher initial ratings has been denied.

The Board finds that the Veteran's menorrhagia was not incurred in or aggravated by active service and is not proximately due to or the result of a service-connected disability.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's chronic lung disease is related to his in-service asbestos exposure and grants service connection for this condition.

The Board has decided to remand the case for further action regarding the propriety of creating an overpayment debt in the amount of $2,400. The validity of this debt will be addressed and a decision on whether it was properly created will be made.

The Veteran's service-connected esophageal hiatal hernia has been manifested by dysphagia and reflux, but not persistently recurrent epigastric distress productive of considerable impairment of health. The criteria for an evaluation in excess of 10 percent have not been met.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for a statement of the case on issues related to overpayment and waiver, as well as scheduling a hearing.