Other conditions Board decisions

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for Raynaud's phenomenon as secondary to his service-connected autoimmune hemolytic anemia and denied his increased rating claims for both autoimmune hemolytic anemia and deep venous thrombosis of the right leg.

The Board found that the veteran's left femur stress fracture residuals do not meet the criteria for a compensable evaluation.

The Board found that the veteran's cataract of the left eye was not incurred in or related to service, and denied this claim.,The Board determined that the residuals of cold injuries to both feet were incurred during service. The veteran testified about experiencing problems with his feet when he arrived in Europe.

The veteran's service-connected residuals of shell fragment wounds to the right index, ring, and small fingers are currently rated at 50 percent. The RO has granted a rating in excess of 50 percent for these conditions.

The veteran's claim for a higher rating for his service-connected ventriculoseptal defect (previously classified as cardiomyopathy with mitral insufficiency) has been granted, effective December 28, 2003. His hypertension was also granted an initial noncompensable rating effective August 18, 1994, and a 10 percent rating effective January 21, 2000.

The veteran's appeal was dismissed due to his death.

The VA denied an increased rating for postoperative residuals of right metatarsal surgery, currently rated at 10 percent.

The veteran's claims for higher initial ratings for his service-connected disabilities were denied. The RO granted service connection and assigned initial ratings, but did not grant the highest possible ratings.

The veteran's request for a waiver of recovery of an overpayment of pension benefits calculated in the amount of $23,497 is granted. The RO recalculated the overpayment based on the nature of the veteran's Social Security award and his first payment from that agency.

The Board has remanded the case for a comprehensive VA examination to determine if gastroesophageal reflux disease or any other diagnosed digestive or respiratory tract disorder is caused by the service-connected metastatic lymphoepithelioma of the right neck. The RO should then review and readjudicate the claim, including determining whether a 100 percent disability rating should be restored.

The veteran seeks service connection for an eye disorder, which she claims had its initial onset during her period of active duty. The Board has ordered a VA examination to determine the etiology of any current eye impairment and whether it is related to service.

The veteran is seeking compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for left eye blindness, but the claim has been remanded due to a lack of medical records and an incomplete surgical report.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate evidence and a need for further examination.

The Board has determined that the veteran's cataract of the right eye is a residual of an in-service injury and grants service connection for this condition.

The Board found that the veteran's misrepresentation of material facts resulted in an overpayment, and thus denied waiver of recovery.

The Board has determined that the veteran's rib cage injury with post-traumatic costochondritis does not warrant a disability rating greater than 20 percent.

The Board has granted a higher evaluation of 40 percent for the veteran's service-connected peptic ulcer disease (PUD), which was previously rated at 20 percent.

The veteran had no service-connected disabilities at the time of his death. The appellant, his widow, sought accrued benefits for unreimbursed medical expenses from 2001, but these were not submitted prior to his death. As there was no outstanding claim for additional VA benefits pending when he died, and as the veteran did not have any unpaid VA benefits due him under existing decisions at the time of his death, the appellant's accrued benefits claim is denied.

The Board denied the veteran's request to reopen his claim for service connection for manic depressive psychosis, finding that the new evidence did not raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim.

The Board has determined that no new and material evidence has been received to reopen the appellant's claim seeking to establish that his character of discharge is not a bar to VA benefits. The RO previously denied this claim in February 1980, finding that his discharge was under other than honorable conditions due to an extended period of absence without leave (AWOL).