Other conditions Board decisions

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection as dementia with possible psychosis, finding that there was no evidence linking his current condition to his period of active military service.

The Board has determined that the veteran's request for waiver of overpayment was timely submitted, and the M&ROC should review the claim on its merits.

The Board denied all the veteran's claims, including for an increased evaluation for his service-connected right eye injury and for special monthly compensation based on bilateral blindness. The veteran was also not granted a total disability rating due to individual unemployability.

The Board found that the January and July 1947 rating decisions denying service connection for weak feet were not clearly and unmistakably erroneous.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for educational assistance benefits under Chapter 30, Title 38, United States Code due to his failure to meet the service eligibility requirements.

The veteran's claims for benefits under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for malnutrition and decubitus ulcers resulting from VA medical treatment in January-March 1995 and March 1996 were denied as there was no evidence of chronic or residual disabilities.

The veteran's claim for a higher rating in excess of 70 percent for his service-connected hysterical psychoneurosis after May 2, 1999 was granted effective from May 3, 1999.

The Board granted increased evaluations of 30 percent for right and left metatarsophalangeal joint implant failures with fusion, effective from the date of the decision.

The Board found that the veteran's service-connected myositis ossificans of the right thigh did not warrant a rating in excess of 10 percent, as there was no limitation of motion or functional loss due to pain. The current 10 percent rating already considered any functional loss due to pain.

The Board denied service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder other than PTSD, finding that the veteran's current diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder, depressed type, is not related to service. The claim for service connection for PTSD was also denied on its merits.

The Board found no evidence of a kidney disorder during service and concluded that the left nephrectomy was not incurred or aggravated by service. The medical opinion provided did not support a nexus between the veteran's service and his current condition.

The Board denied a compensable rating for the service-connected loss of all teeth, finding that the veteran's tooth loss was not due to 'service trauma' and that there is no appreciable bone loss. The appeal also included issues regarding new and material evidence to reopen previously denied claims.

The Board denied reopening of previously disallowed claims for service connection due to lack of new and material evidence.

The Board found that the veteran's spinal disc syndrome, currently rated at 40 percent, does not warrant a higher evaluation as it is productive of no greater than severe intervertebral disc syndrome symptomatology.

The veteran's claims for service connection for Epstein-Barr virus, a disorder manifest by general health problems and degeneration of the bones and spine were denied as there was no evidence linking these conditions to his active duty service or exposure to ionizing radiation.

The VA has denied the veteran's claim for an increased disability evaluation for his right distal tibia fracture, currently rated at 30 percent. The Board found that the evidence does not support a higher rating based on malunion of the tibia and fibula with marked knee or ankle disability.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the claim for entitlement to service connection for a psychiatric disorder to include schizophrenia. The veteran's testimony as to his psychiatric treatment in service contributes to a more complete picture of the circumstances surrounding the origin of his psychiatric disability.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not currently have mitral valve prolapse or urethral stenosis, and therefore service connection for these conditions is denied.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for a rating in excess of 40 percent for adenocarcinoma of the prostate manifested by urinary incontinence and an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for a radical prostatectomy scar. The RO found that there was no evidence showing the use of an appliance or the wearing of absorbent materials which must be changed more than four times per day.

The veteran's claim for an increased rating for residuals of a resection of the right 10th rib was granted, with a combined rating of 20 percent (10 percent for the resection and associated nerve damage, plus 10 percent for the tender and painful scar).