Other conditions Board decisions

The veteran's claim for an initial compensable disability evaluation for service-connected status post pulmonary embolism is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including a new VA examination.

The Board found that the veteran's heart condition did not start during service and is not related to his military service. As a result, the claim for service connection was denied.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for basic eligibility for VA benefits due to a lack of qualifying service as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army, including recognized guerrillas, in the United States Armed Forces.

The Board is remanding the case to comply with VA's duty to notify and assist claimants in substantiating a claim for VA benefits, including providing proper notice regarding reopening of claims.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for a higher rating for his lumbar spine disability and also found that he did not timely file an appeal regarding the earlier effective date for his total disability rating based on individual unemployability.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining an etiological opinion regarding the right index finger disability. The veteran's claim will be reconsidered based on this new evidence.

The Board finds that the fibrocystic breast disease results in pain and tenderness of both breasts, resulting in separate 10 percent ratings for each breast.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining medical records and scheduling a VA nephrology examination.

The Board has denied the veteran's claim for service connection for cartilage deterioration, including as secondary to his service-connected erythema multiforme. The evidence does not support a finding of current cartilage deterioration.

The Board has determined that the veteran's post-operative lysis of adhesions following hernia repair does not warrant a rating in excess of 10 percent.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development, including providing pertinent rating criteria and affording him more recent VA examinations to assess the severity of his service-connected right and left femur disabilities.

The Board has remanded the case for further procedural and evidentiary development due to failure to obtain medical records from Henry Ford Hospital.

The Board found that the veteran's sleep disorder did not have its onset during active service or result from disease or injury in service, and thus denied his claim for service connection.

The Board has remanded the case due to a need for additional development, including providing notice under 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103(a) and obtaining a VA examination to determine whether ulcerative colitis was aggravated in service.

The veteran's spouse received an apportionment of the veteran's disability compensation benefits from August 2001 until their divorce in December 2004. The appeal is dismissed as there are no allegations of specific error of fact or law.

The veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses incurred with private medical providers from October 26, 2004 to December 5, 2004 is denied. The criteria for reimbursement under the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 1725 and its implementing regulations are not met.

The Board denied an increased rating for the service-connected residuals of a shell fragment wound of the left groin with fibromyositis and retained foreign body, but granted a separate 10 percent rating on the basis that the disability picture includes manifestations more closely approximating an unstable superficial scar.

The Board denied the veteran's claim of service connection for defective hearing in the right ear, finding no evidence of a current disability related to service.

The February 1972 rating decision was found to have made clear and unmistakable errors in failing to separately rate the veteran's chest shrapnel wounds and right leg scar.,The veteran's chest injuries were granted service connection, but not rated. The right leg scar was appropriately rated.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for an increased amount of accrued benefits, finding that he is not eligible due to his age and lack of other qualifying criteria.