Other conditions Board decisions

The veteran is entitled to compensation for TMJ dysfunction, which he claims was caused by dental treatment authorized by the VA from 1983 to 1993. The claim is based on direct service connection and not involving any presumption or secondary conditions.

The Board previously denied the veteran's request for a compensable rating for his service-connected bilateral defective hearing. The Court has ordered the case back to the RO for another decision, taking into consideration new evidence and additional information provided by the appellant.

The veteran's myeloblastic leukemia is not due to service or exposure to Agent Orange, and the claim for service connection is denied.

The veteran's claim for an increased rating for lymphadenitis was denied as the evidence did not show that he met the criteria for a compensable evaluation.

The Board denied the veteran's attempt to reopen his claim for nonservice-connected pension benefits due to lack of new and material evidence.

The veteran's right foot disorder, including degenerative joint disease and loss of the longitudinal arch, is currently rated at 20 percent under Diagnostic Code 5010 (post-traumatic arthritis) - 5284 for a moderately severe foot injury. The claim has been granted.

The Board denied the veteran's attempt to reopen his claim for service connection of a bilateral hip disorder, finding that no new and material evidence had been submitted.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for cardiovascular disease, including Prinzmetal's disease, finding that there was no evidence linking the condition to service or a service-connected disability.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for waiver of overpayment, finding that he was at fault in creating the overpayment due to his failure to notify VA promptly of his divorce and remarriage. The decision also noted that recovery would not result in undue financial hardship.

The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected postoperative residuals of adenocarcinoma of the appendix and colon with history of ulcerative colitis do not warrant an increased disability rating in excess of 30 percent.

The Board denied an increased disability evaluation for left eye enucleation, finding that the appellant's condition does not meet the criteria for a higher rating based on inability to wear a prosthesis or having light perception only in the nonservice-connected right eye.

The Board found that the appellant's diagnosed sinus disorder has not been shown to have had its onset during active duty, including service in the Persian Gulf War. Therefore, the claim for service connection was denied.

The Board granted a 40 percent disability evaluation for the veteran's service-connected herniated disc at L4-5, finding that the evidence raised a reasonable doubt as to whether the condition is productive of severe impairment.

The Board found no medical evidence linking the veteran's current back disability to an in-service injury, thus denying service connection.

The Board denied service connection for a benign chromophobe adenoma of the pituitary gland, finding that it was not incurred or aggravated by service and could not be presumed to have been so incurred due to exposure to ionizing radiation.

The VA denied the veteran's claim for an increased evaluation of his right knee disability, finding that the current 20 percent rating adequately reflects the severity of his condition.

The Board has restored the veteran's 10 percent disability rating for keratoconus of his right eye, finding that there is no evidence to show an improvement in his condition since service.

The Board has ordered the RO to consider additional evidence submitted by the appellant and to provide a supplemental statement of the case. The veteran was also given an opportunity to request a hearing before a member of the Board at the RO, but no such hearing was scheduled.

The veteran's left knee disabilities, including arthritis and instability, are currently rated at 10 percent. The Board finds that the evidence does not support an increase in these ratings.

The veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for decreased visual acuity of the left eye due to VA surgical treatment in November 1995 is denied as not well-grounded.