Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has determined that the veteran's post-phlebitis syndrome with associated varicose veins of the left leg does not meet the criteria for a rating in excess of 40 percent.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claim for an effective date prior to August 19, 2002 for service connection of chronic prostatitis with recurrent urinary tract infection is denied as there was no intent on his part to apply for compensation after a final denial in February 1978.

The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected deformities of the right and left ears more nearly approximate two characteristics of disfigurement, warranting a 30 percent rating.

The case is being remanded for further development due to inconsistencies in the medical records and need for a VA examination.

The Board has determined that the veteran's prostate cancer is currently in remission and does not warrant a higher disability rating.

The Board has determined that the veteran's spouse needed regular aid and attendance as of December 15, 1990, which is considered an informal claim. The effective date for the award of increased compensation based on his spouse being in need of regular aid and attendance was granted to January 28, 2000.

The veteran's claim for reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses incurred at Swedish American Health System is being remanded due to the need for additional development regarding the feasibility and safety of transferring her from a VA facility.

The Board found that the veteran's leg sores were not incurred in or aggravated by service, and as there is no positive association between exposure to herbicides and any condition for which the Secretary has not specifically determined a presumption of service connection is warranted, the claim was denied.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development due to missed VA examinations and requests for a review of the claims file. The appellant's claim is pending as he seeks service connection for multiple joint pain, which may be related to undiagnosed illness in the Persian Gulf War.

The Board has determined that the veteran's gunshot wounds to the chest and left arm warrant increased ratings, with a 60 percent rating for residuals of a gunshot wound to the chest and separate 10, 20, and 20 percent ratings for residuals of gunshot wounds to the left arm.

The Board has granted a 30 percent rating for the pleural cavity injury as a shell fragment wound, effective from the date of the decision.

The Board denied a higher rating for IVDS from February 12, 1992 to April 17, 2002 and denied an earlier effective date for the grant of TDIU.

The VA determined that the veteran's mitral valve prolapse with chest pains does not warrant a higher disability rating, as his current workload is greater than 5 METs but less than or equal to 7 METs, and he has not experienced episodes of congestive heart failure.

The Board found that the reduction of the veteran's rating from 20% to 10% for his service-connected status post right eye injury was proper, as the evidence showed improvement in his condition and he no longer met the criteria for a higher rating.

The Board denied the veteran's request for a waiver of recovery of an overpayment of nonservice-connected pension benefits, finding that fault was on the part of the veteran and that recovery would not be against equity and good conscience.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for the cause of his death and eligibility for Dependents' Educational Assistance under Chapter 35, finding that there was no competent evidence linking any service-connected disability to his death.

The Board found that the appellant was at fault in creating the overpayment of death pension benefits, and thus denied her request for a waiver.

The Board has determined that the veteran is entitled to a 30 percent rating for his service-connected ulcerative colitis, which includes symptoms of alternating diarrhea and constipation. The veteran's gastritis was also considered but did not warrant an additional rating.

The Board has remanded the case to the RO for consideration of additional evidence submitted by the veteran, and a Supplemental Statement of the Case must be issued.

The Board has decided to remand the case for additional development, including obtaining medical records and arranging for a VA examination.