Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has determined that the veteran's claimed conditions, including PVD and gastrointestinal disability, were not incurred or aggravated by service. The evidence does not support a finding of service connection for these conditions.

The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected bilateral foot disability, which is manifested by pain on motion and loss of function due to pain, equates to a compensable (10 percent) disability rating for pes cavus.

The Board has determined that the veteran's bilateral femur fractures do not meet the criteria for a compensable evaluation or an evaluation in excess of 20 percent, as there is no evidence of significant impairment affecting daily activities.

The Board has determined that a higher evaluation is warranted for the veteran's degenerative joint disease of both knees and medial instability of the right knee, but not for pseudo-gout. The effective date remains unchanged.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for a chronic acquired gynecological disorder claimed as residuals of removal of the right ovary, finding that there was no evidence linking her current condition to her service-connected left salpingo-oophorectomy or any other in-service event.

The Board finds that the appellant was not permanently incapable of self-support at age eighteen, and thus does not meet the criteria for recognition as a 'child' of the veteran.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have a current stomach disorder and there is no evidence of an ulcer, peptic or gastric, to a compensable degree within a year of service discharge. Therefore, the claim for service connection for a stomach disorder is denied.

The VA cholecystectomy and intraoperative cholangiogram in April 1984 did not result in chronic abdominal pain, lumps, or masses. The veteran's current complaints of abdominal pain are attributed to other causes.

The Board denied the veteran's application to reopen his claim for service connection for a left eye disability, finding that the new evidence did not meet the criteria of being both new and material.

The Board found that the veteran's thrombocytopenia and erythrocytosis did not warrant a rating in excess of 30 percent.

The Board has remanded the case due to an error in development, specifically regarding the preliminary issue of the appellant's character of discharge. The RO must now determine if the appellant wishes to continue his appeal for pension purposes and whether his character of discharge is a bar to entitlement to VA benefits.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the veteran's claim of service connection for peptic ulcer disease, which had previously been denied. The Board also found that the veteran's peptic ulcer disease is related to his military service.

The Board has determined that additional evidence is needed to properly evaluate the veteran's right eye disability, including VA treatment records and an ophthalmologist examination. The case will be remanded for these actions.

The Board has determined that the appellant's discharge was under dishonorable conditions due to willful and persistent misconduct, which is a legal bar to VA benefits. The evidence submitted since May 1981 does not constitute new and material evidence to reopen the claim.

The Board has determined that the veteran is entitled to a 10 percent evaluation for Crohn's disease since November 1, 1999. The issue of entitlement to an effective date prior to January 25, 1993, for service connection remains unresolved.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for an initial evaluation in excess of 60 percent for right hemidiaphragm paralysis and entitlement to TDIU, finding that the evidence did not meet the criteria for a higher rating under applicable diagnostic codes.

The appeal has been dismissed as the appellant withdrew their appeal prior to a decision being made.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims of service connection for dental trauma and residuals of right heel injury, finding that no new and material evidence was submitted to support reopening these claims.

The Board found that the veteran's failure to submit acceptable provider proof of payment for medical expenses led to an increase in countable income, resulting in an overpayment. The Committee denied waiver due to fault on the part of the veteran and lack of evidence showing repayment would cause financial hardship or be against equity and good conscience.

The Board has determined that the veteran's right eye disability is secondary to his service-connected traumatic skull defect and grants this claim.