Other conditions decisions — 2013

The Veteran's non-negotiated payment for retroactive VA benefits ($32,617.00) is denied as neither the appellant nor the estate of the Veteran has any legal entitlement to such payment.

The Veteran's claim for competency to handle VA benefits purposes has been remanded due to his failure to report for a scheduled hearing. The case will be handled by scheduling the Veteran for a videoconference hearing at the RO.

The Veteran's request for a total disability rating due to individual employability resulting from service-connected disability has been remanded by the Board. The case will be processed again after scheduling a hearing at the local RO.

The Veteran's chronic left foot disability, identified as bone spur and arthritis, is found to be etiologically linked to his active service. His claim for a higher rating for the left ankle sprain is also granted.

The Veteran's claims for service connection and a compensable evaluation are being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining updated VA treatment records and scheduling a VA examination.

The case is being remanded to allow for the scheduling of a hearing before the Board at the local regional office.

The Veteran's claim of service connection for a right humerus disability is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including an examination.

The Veteran's right ring finger fracture residuals and bilateral hearing loss have not manifested with an exceptional disability picture. The Board finds that the evidence does not support a compensable evaluation for either condition.

The Veteran's claims for service connection are being remanded due to the need for additional development, including scheduling VA examinations and obtaining medical records.

The Veteran's cause of death is being reviewed, and the issue of service connection for acute myeloid leukemia will be remanded due to incomplete medical records.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete records and the need for additional medical opinions regarding service connection for a left hip disorder.

The Veteran's nonservice-connected pension was reduced, and the appellant is seeking reimbursement for expenses he paid on behalf of his father from February 2009 until his death in June 2009. The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient evidence regarding specific expenses incurred during the last sickness.

The Veteran is seeking payment for medical services provided at HI-Desert Medical Center on December 5, 2012. The Board has determined that a VA medical opinion is needed to determine if the treatment was for an emergent condition and whether a VA facility was feasibly available.

The Veteran's left hand disability was rated at 40 percent effective January 18, 2012. The claim for TDIU prior to October 1, 2006 is denied.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bronchiectasis is related to his active military service, and thus granted service connection for this condition. The cause of death due to bronchiectasis was also found to be related to service-connected disabilities.

The appellant does not have qualifying service as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army, including recognized guerrillas, in the Armed Forces of the United States. Therefore, he is not considered a 'Veteran' for VA compensation purposes and is not eligible for a one-time payment from the FVEC Fund.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) is related to his exposure to Agent Orange during service, and thus grants service connection for MDS.

The Board found that there is no evidence of a nexus between the Veteran's current dyspnea and his service, including asbestos exposure. The claim was denied as the preponderance of the evidence did not support the connection.

The Veteran's appeals for increased ratings were denied. The right arm sensory impairment was rated at 10 percent, and the bilateral ear lobe sebaceous cysts were rated at 30 percent.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for additional evidence and a new medical opinion regarding whether any current eye disorder is related to the in-service left eye injury.