Other conditions decisions — 2009

The Veteran's emergency treatment for swelling in his legs was approved as it met the criteria for emergency services, given that delay would have been hazardous to life or health. The condition is not service-connected and VA facilities were not feasibly available.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for nonservice-connected pension benefits due to a lack of qualifying service under VA regulations.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development due to a lack of communication with the appellant's representative.

The Veteran's appeal for payment of unauthorized medical expenses incurred at the Wythe County Community Hospital in September 2006 was dismissed due to his death.

The Veteran's claim for compensation under the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 is granted as his intracranial hemorrhage was caused by VA medical care, specifically due to a delay in recognizing and treating his symptoms.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's right index finger degenerative joint disease is likely related to active service and grants his claim for service connection.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for peripheral vascular disease, cardiovascular disease, nerve damage of the right foot, gastric ulcers, and genitourinary infection. The evidence did not establish a nexus between these conditions and his military service.

The Board found that the appellant knowingly misrepresented her income from Social Security Administration (SSA) disability benefits, which resulted in an overpayment of VA death pension benefits. The Board concluded that this constituted bad faith and thus precluded a waiver of recovery.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for residuals of dengue fever and a skin disorder have been denied as there is no evidence to support the claimed conditions are related to his military service.

The Veteran's facial twitching and spasm of the left side of the face is currently rated at 20 percent, which is the maximum rating available under Diagnostic Code 8299-8207. The Board finds that this rating adequately reflects the severity of his condition based on the symptoms described.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including verification of the Veteran's service and types of duty performed.

The Board has decided to remand the case for further development due to missing Social Security Administration records, and will not make a decision on the merits until these records are obtained.

The Veteran's claims for increased evaluations of his ulnar nerve injury and non-union fracture with traumatic arthritis were denied as the evidence did not meet the criteria for a higher evaluation.

The VA determined that the veteran's spondylolisthesis at L4-S1 does not warrant a rating higher than 20 percent, as it did not meet the criteria for an increased rating based on forward flexion of the thoracolumbar spine or favorable ankylosis.

The appellant's father designated his daughter as the beneficiary of his NSLI policy. However, a later designation named another individual as the sole beneficiary. The Board found that the latter designation was valid and upheld the payment to the new beneficiary.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the appellant's claim, which was previously denied. The appeal will now be adjudicated on its merits.

The Veteran's service-connected status-post laparotomy, liver damage with drainage is currently rated at 30 percent and the Board finds no basis to grant a higher rating. The Veteran also seeks service connection for third degree burns, bilateral eyes but this issue was not addressed in the decision.

The Board denied the Veteran's request for a waiver of overpayment of VA TDIU benefits, finding that his actions demonstrated bad faith in obtaining and continuing receipt of these benefits.

The Board denied the Veteran's attempt to reopen his claim for service connection for cardiovascular disease, finding that new and material evidence had not been received.

The Board dismissed the appeal due to the appellant's death, as it has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of his claims at this time.