Other conditions decisions — 2004

The veteran is seeking service connection for squamous cell carcinoma of the right tonsil, which he claims as a residual of Agent Orange exposure during his military service. The case has been remanded to provide VCAA notice and complete necessary development.

The veteran's claim for recognition as the dependent spouse of H.R.W. was denied because her prior marriage to D.C. was not legally terminated, and she did not provide evidence that a diligent search had been made to determine if her husband was alive.

The Board denied the veteran's request for a waiver of overpayment of improved disability pension benefits due to his failure to promptly report receipt of Social Security benefits, which resulted in an overpayment. The decision found that the veteran acted with bad faith by seeking unfair advantage.

The Board has remanded the case due to a lack of VCAA notification and for further verification of the appellant's spouse's service eligibility.

The veteran is seeking an initial compensable rating for his left elbow injury. The Board has determined that additional development, including a VA examination and consideration of the evidence, is needed to properly adjudicate this claim.

The Board found that the veteran's death was not caused by or related to his service-connected condition, and thus denied the claim for service connection for the cause of death.

The Board found that the overpayment of VA benefits in the amount of $24,640 was not properly created due to sole administrative error by VA. As a result, there is no overpayment for recovery purposes.

The Board denied the claim of entitlement to VA benefits based on the veteran's death, finding that the appellant is not a legally valid claimant for these benefits as he was over 18 years old and did not become permanently incapable of self-support before reaching age 18.

The Board found that the veteran's application for MGIB education benefits was timely and granted his claim, as there were no indications of fault on his part in the delay caused by the educational institution.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for a bilateral eye condition, finding no evidence of an in-service injury or disease related to his current condition. The claim was also not well-grounded as there is no medical evidence showing a current disability related to service.

The Board denied initial compensable evaluations for a laceration of the right forearm and left varicocele, finding that there was no evidence to support higher ratings based on functional impairment or symptoms.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses incurred at a private facility on May 22, 2002. The treatment was not authorized in advance and did not meet the criteria for reimbursement under VA regulations.

The Board found no current left knee disorder and denied the veteran's claim for service connection for a left knee disability, including degenerative joint disease.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining medical records and arranging for a VA examination to determine if the veteran's left breast cyst is related to service.

The Board has determined that the veteran's current bilateral foot disorders are not related to his service, specifically the cellulitis he had in service. Therefore, service connection for bilateral foot fungus is denied.

The Board found that the veteran's bilateral defective hearing did not meet the criteria for a compensable evaluation under VA's rating schedule, and thus denied his claim.

The Board has determined that the veteran's currently diagnosed Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) was incurred in service, and grants service connection for SLE.

The case is being remanded for the appellant to be scheduled for a Travel Board hearing in connection with her DIC appeal.

The Board has decided to remand the case for further development of evidence, including obtaining medical records and scheduling a VA examination.

The veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for additional development, including a VA ophthalmology examination.