Other conditions Board decisions

The Board determined that the veteran's low back disability, characterized by traumatic arthritis and a fracture of the transverse process of L4 vertebra, does not warrant an evaluation in excess of 20 percent.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for bladder neck hypertrophy and increased ratings for brachial plexopathy with myofascial pain syndrome on both sides, as well as a compensable evaluation for ulcer disease with hiatal hernia. The evidence did not support these claims.

The Board denied service connection for cicatrix of the right axilla, finding that it preexisted service and was not aggravated by service.

The Board denied the veteran's claim of reopening his service connection for a nervous disorder, finding that new and material evidence had not been submitted.

The veteran's skin disability is found to be related to his military service, and thus service connection is granted.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the claim of entitlement to service connection for the cause of the veteran's death. The case is now remanded for further development.

The Board has determined that the cause of the veteran's death, metastatic adenocarcinoma of unknown primary site, was not caused or contributed to by any service-connected disability. The Board also found no evidence linking this cancer to military service exposure to ionizing radiation or asbestos.

The Board found no evidence of a chronic respiratory disorder in service or for many years thereafter, and denied the veteran's claim for service connection.

The veteran's claims for increased ratings were granted, with a 10% rating assigned effective March 5, 2003, for residuals of the left hand laceration and a separate 10% rating for nerve damage to the left index finger. The claim for an increase in the disability rating for the stress fracture of the left third metatarsal was denied.

The veteran's claim for an increased evaluation for intervertebral disc syndrome was denied by the RO. The case is being remanded to obtain additional evidence and ensure full compliance with directives.

The Board has ordered further development due to pending issues regarding service connection for dysphagia and a compensable disability rating for the gunshot wound to the chest. The case is being remanded back to the RO for additional examination and evaluation.

The Board found that new and material evidence had not been submitted to reopen the claim of entitlement to service connection for a right eye condition.

The VA denied the veteran's claim for reimbursement or payment of unauthorized medical treatment provided on June 16, 2001.

The Board denied the veteran's request for a waiver to recover an overpayment of $16,324 in pension benefits due to bad faith in not accurately reporting his income from Social Security.

The Board has ordered further development due to the need for additional evidence. The case is now being remanded to the RO for specific actions, including obtaining medical records and arranging an examination.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection and a compensable rating for his postoperative residuals of bilateral inguinal herniorrhaphies, including surgical scars. The case is being remanded to obtain additional medical records and provide further examination.

The Board denied the appellant's claim to be recognized as the veteran's surviving spouse for VA death benefits, finding no new and material evidence had been submitted since the previous denial.

The Board has ordered further development due to the need for additional evidence and clarification. The case is now being sent back to the RO for the requested development, including obtaining medical records from the VA Medical Center in Louisville, Kentucky, and arranging for a physician's examination to determine the etiology of the veteran's ventral incisional hernia.

The veteran's request for special monthly compensation based on the need for regular aid and attendance of another person or based on housebound status is being remanded to allow for a hearing before a member of the Board sitting at the RO.

The case is being remanded to ensure due process and the appellant is notified of the evidence needed to substantiate his claim.