Other conditions decisions — 2011

The Veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses incurred at a non-VA facility is denied as the treatment did not meet the criteria for emergency treatment and VA facilities were not feasibly available.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a skin disorder, finding that there is insufficient evidence to establish a link between his current condition and herbicide exposure during service. The claim was remanded multiple times but still remains pending.

The Board has determined that the strokes with residual blindness suffered in February 2006 were caused by the service-connected left total knee replacement completed earlier that month. Therefore, the Veteran's claim for service connection is granted.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for a skin disease is being remanded due to the need for further development. The claim for an earlier effective date for posttraumatic stress disorder is also being remanded.

The Board has dismissed the appeal due to the Veteran's death, and no jurisdiction remains for the merits of this claim.

The Veteran's pre-existing hip disorders were aggravated by service, leading to the need for hip replacements. The Board has granted service connection for both left and right hip replacements.

The Board has determined that the appellant's hysterectomy was due to uterine fibroids, which were noted in service. Therefore, service connection for residuals of uterine fibroids and a hysterectomy is granted.

The Veteran's right hip disability is currently rated at 10 percent, but does not meet the criteria for a higher rating based on limitation of motion or other relevant diagnostic codes. The Board finds that his symptoms do not warrant an increased rating.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining a VA examination to determine if any skin disability found to be present had its onset in or is related to service, specifically his in-service herbicide exposure. The Veteran's claim will be readjudicated after this additional development.

The Veteran is granted a disability rating of 100 percent for service-connected narcolepsy, the highest available rating under Diagnostic Code 8911.

The Veteran's right and left knee disabilities are manifested by pain resulting in antalgic gait and twitching, which impacts his functional ability. The Board has granted a 10 percent disability rating for each knee since August 23, 2005.

The Veteran's squamous cell carcinoma of the left tonsillar fossa is being remanded for a VA examination to determine if it is related to service, including exposure to herbicides.

The Board has determined that the appellant may be recognized as the surviving spouse of the Veteran for purposes of entitlement to VA death benefits. The issue now is whether her income qualifies her for improved death pension benefits.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for full and complete compliance with the duty-to-notify provisions of the VCAA, as well as an additional VA examination.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further evaluation due to overlapping symptoms and the need for a medical opinion.

The Veteran's appeal to have the effective date for his TDIU changed from June 17, 1999 to an earlier date was dismissed as a freestanding claim is not allowed after a final decision.

The Veteran's cause of death, acute myeloid leukemia, was not service-connected and there is no evidence to support a presumption of exposure to Agent Orange. The Board finds that the Veteran's service-connected disabilities did not contribute substantially or materially to his death.

The Veteran's active duty service did not occur during a period of war, and therefore he is not eligible for nonservice-connected pension.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's facial cyst is related to service and grants service connection for this condition.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient notice on how to reopen a prior final decision and because of the need for additional records related to the appellant's applications to upgrade his discharge.