Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has determined that the veteran's residuals of mumps, including hypogonadism (atrophy of the testes), pancreatitis (pancreatic atrophy), and endocrinopathy, are service-connected as these conditions began during his time in service.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for suspension of his pension benefits due to incarceration, finding that the law prohibits such payments during the sixty-first day after conviction and up until release from prison.

The veteran's claim for a 10 percent disability evaluation for the residuals of a head injury from June 19, 1945, through October 18, 1993 is being remanded due to incomplete records.

The veteran's spouse was not recognized as the surviving spouse for VA benefits due to her divorce from the veteran prior to his death.

The veteran's service-connected posterior subscapular cataract of the right eye is currently rated as noncompensable. The Board finds that this rating is not warranted based on the visual acuity in both eyes.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for the cause of his death and eligibility for Survivors' and Dependents' Educational Assistance under Chapter 35, Title 38, United States Code due to a lack of well-grounded evidence.

The Board denied the veteran's claim that his left hand injuries were not incurred in line of duty, but granted that they resulted from willful misconduct. The case is remanded for consideration of an effective date prior to June 11, 1992.

The Board determined that the proper effective date for the award of SMC under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1114(s) is March 18, 1983.

The Board has remanded the case due to an incomplete appellate record, and it is now required to refer the matter to the Under Secretary for Benefits for further consideration under section 3.311 of VA regulations.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claim for service connection for the excision of an enlarged lymph node secondary to her service-connected thyrotoxicosis with Grave's Disease is not well grounded, as there is no medical evidence showing a current disability.

The Board denied the veteran's request for waiver of recovery of a $4,695 overpayment in disability pension benefits due to bad faith on his part.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claims for service connection for his claimed disabilities are not well-grounded, as there is no evidence of a nexus between his current conditions and his military service.

The Board has granted service connection for a left arm fracture and subdural hematoma residuals as secondary to the veteran's service-connected PTSD.

The Board finds that the veteran's loss of vision in the left eye and left arm weakness are directly related to VA treatment received in May 1990, warranting compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151.

The veteran's claim for an increased rating for his service-connected fracture residuals, right (major) ring and fifth fingers is being remanded due to the need for additional development of the record.

The Board found that the appellant was at fault in creating the loan guaranty indebtedness and denied his request for a waiver of the debt, as he did not show hardship in repayment.

The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected residuals of a shrapnel wound to the right forearm, with open fractures of the ulna and muscle damage to Muscle Group VIII, are productive of severe impairment warranting an increased rating to 30 percent.

The VA determined that the veteran is no longer unemployable due to his service-connected bilateral eye condition, as he has been employed and earning income for several years.

The veteran's claim for an increased rating for recurrent costochondritis of the left chest wall with myofascial pain syndrome was denied. The timeliness of her substantive appeal regarding an earlier effective date for a compensable evaluation was also addressed and found to be untimely.

The Board has determined that the claim for service connection for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, to include as secondary to herbicide exposure in Vietnam, is not well grounded. The veteran did not serve in the Republic of Vietnam and there is no competent medical evidence linking his current diagnosis to service or to herbicide exposure.