Other conditions decisions — 2001

The Board found that the veteran's request for waiver of recovery of an overpayment in the calculated amount of $5,959.20 was not timely filed and denied this issue. However, the Board granted the veteran's waiver of recovery of an overpayment in the calculated amount of $4,739 due to lack of fault on his part and financial hardship.

The veteran's nephew is denied entitlement to $1587.56 for reimbursement from accrued amounts due a deceased beneficiary as he is not eligible under the law.

The U.S. Army Reserve Personnel Center has certified that the appellant's deceased husband had no service as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army, including the recognized guerrillas, in the service of the United States Armed Forces. Therefore, the appellant does not have legal entitlement to VA benefits.

The veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for a 10 percent evaluation for service-connected posterolateral osteophyte with pain, right hip, as secondary to service-connected disability of the right knee is denied.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for VA benefits due to her deceased husband not having recognized service in the United States Armed Forces, thus lacking legal entitlement.

The Board denied the appellant's request for a waiver of recovery of an overpayment of $3,560.00 due to her failure to file the request within 180 days of notification.

The Board denied the appellant's application to reopen her claim of entitlement to service connection for the cause of the veteran's death, finding that no new and material evidence had been submitted.

The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected malaria does not warrant a compensable rating, as there is no evidence of active disease or moderate disability resulting from the condition.

The veteran's appeal is denied as he did not submit a claim for additional compensation benefits based on his second marriage to D.K.L. within one year of the marriage, and therefore, the effective date could not be retroactively set.

The Board has determined that the appellant did not have recognized service as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army, including the recognized guerrillas, in the service of the United States Armed Forces. Therefore, he does not meet the criteria for basic eligibility for VA benefits.

The Board denied the motion for revision of its November 30, 1970 decision on grounds of clear and unmistakable error. The decision was not based on incorrect application of a statute or regulation, nor did it incorporate the 'correct' facts as known at the time.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for the cause of her death, finding that her colon cancer was not caused by or aggravated by her military service.

The Board has determined that the December 30, 1960 reduction in the veteran's disability rating from 40 percent to 20 percent was not proper and granted his claim. The issue of an effective date prior to June 28, 1993 for a 40 percent evaluation is dismissed as moot.

The Board has determined that the veteran's neurosis, mixed type does not meet or approximate the criteria for a rating in excess of 30 percent.

The Board denied the appellant's request for an extension of time to file a substantive appeal to the August 1997 rating decision, which granted his claim for permanent incapacity for self-support.

The veteran's claim for service connection for a left varicocele is being remanded due to the need for additional medical records and examination.

The veteran's unauthorized hospitalization at the HPRH on April 5, 1996 was for treatment of a non-service-connected condition (left ureteral calculus) and not an emergency situation. VA facilities were feasibly available and reasonable prior authorization could have been obtained.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals found that the veteran's PTSD was not incurred in or aggravated by active service, and denied his claim.

The Board denied service connection for the cause of the veteran's death claimed as secondary to in-service smoking and denied entitlement to Dependents' Educational Assistance (DEA).

The Board has determined that the overpayment was improperly created and is now remanding the case for further action.