Other conditions decisions — 2004

The Board found that the appellant did not have qualifying service as a veteran and therefore does not meet the basic eligibility requirements for VA nonservice-connected pension benefits.

The veteran's claims to reopen his service connection for respiratory and dental disorders are being remanded due to the need for compliance with the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000 (VCAA).

The veteran's claim for reimbursement of unauthorized medical services provided during his hospitalization at Washington Regional Medical Center from May 25, 2001 to June 4, 2001 was denied because VA facilities were feasibly available and the veteran could have been transferred by air to Little Rock.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to determine if the veteran has Cushing's syndrome and/or osteoporosis, as well as whether these conditions are related to his service-connected steroid dependent bronchial asthma. The case will be remanded for further examination and opinion.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for VA educational assistance as he did not meet the eligibility requirements under Chapter 30 of Title 38, United States Code.

The case is being remanded for further development due to VCAA compliance issues.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for VA benefits due to a lack of service in the U.S. Armed Forces, as certified by the service department.

The Board has remanded the case to the RO for further review, including consideration of new evidence related to service connection for hairy cell leukemia and compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151.

The Board has determined that the veteran's spouse's income should be included in the computation of annual countable income for pension purposes.

The Board has determined that the veteran's post-polio syndrome is related to his active service, and thus grants service connection for this condition.

The VA determined that the veteran's right shoulder disability, which primarily consists of painful motion with some weakness and fatigue, does not warrant a higher rating than the current 20 percent.

The Board found no evidence linking the veteran's death to his service, and thus denied the claim for service connection for the cause of death.

The Board is remanding the case for further development and consideration of the veteran's claims, including obtaining additional evidence and arranging for appropriate examinations to determine the current severity of his bilateral hallux valgus and arthritis.

The Board denied the appellant's claims for service connection for cause of death, accrued benefits, and nonservice-connected death pension benefits due to lack of evidence linking the veteran's death to his active military service.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for VA benefits, finding that her spouse did not have valid military service in the United States Armed Forces.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete service medical records and the need for further examination. The appellant's claim of entitlement to service connection for dental injury is pending.

The veteran is seeking reimbursement for unauthorized medical expenses incurred on April 2, 2002. The VAMC denied the claim based on eligibility under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1728. However, the Board found that the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 1725 and its implementing regulations may apply to her case due to the timing of the treatment and the new law. The VAMC is required to review the claim under these new laws.

The Board found that the April 6, 1987 rating decision denying service connection for residuals of a hysterectomy contained clear and unmistakable error due to failure to apply relevant regulations. The effective date is set at January 28, 1987.

The Board has remanded the veteran's claim for an increased disability rating for his service-connected status post laminectomy, L4-L5, with radicular pain due to new and material evidence submitted in connection with his bilateral pes planus and hallux valgus claim. The case will be reviewed under the revised criteria for all relevant regulations, including those pertaining to the range of motion of the cervical and thoracolumbar spine.

The Board has remanded the case for further development and re-adjudication due to issues related to the veteran's claim of entitlement to a total disability evaluation for compensation purposes on the basis of individual unemployability (TDIU).