Other conditions decisions — 2014

The Veteran's service does not qualify her for either educational program (Montgomery GI Bill or Veterans' Educational Assistance Program) due to the timing of her enlistment and discharge. Her request for an extension was not timely filed, thus denying her eligibility.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development, including a VA examination to assess the current nature and severity of his service-connected right arm/elbow disability.

The Veteran's discharge from active duty was due to a personality disorder, which is not service-connected. The case is being remanded for further development and adjudication of his claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder.

The Veteran's appeal has been dismissed due to his death during the pendency of this appeal.

The Veteran is seeking compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for allergic reaction residuals and service connection for a cervical spine disability and right eye disability. The Board finds that additional development, including VA examinations, is necessary to address these claims.

The Board has dismissed the appeal due to the appellant's withdrawal of the appeal.

The Veteran's death was not caused by a service-connected disability, and there is no evidence of exposure to Agent Orange or other presumptive conditions. The cause of death was attributed to the fatal aortic aneurysm, which occurred after service.

The Veteran's claim for a compensable evaluation for scabies is being remanded due to the need for additional VA treatment records and examinations.

The Board found that the termination of the appellant's death pension benefits on July 1, 2011 was improper due to her countable income being less than the maximum annual pension rate.

The appellant's income exceeds the maximum annual pension rate for a surviving spouse, thus denying her entitlement to nonservice-connected death pension benefits.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for a one-time payment from the FVEC Fund as he does not have qualifying military service as a matter of law.

The Veteran is seeking service connection for squamous cell carcinoma of the left hypopharynx, which he claims was caused by herbicide exposure during his Vietnam service. The case has been remanded due to a lack of private treatment records from Dr. Sharkey.

The Veteran's unauthorized medical expenses incurred from January 14, 2010 to January 19, 2010 for treatment of a fractured left leg were granted as the condition stabilized on January 14, 2010 and he could not have been safely transferred prior to that date.

The Veteran's unauthorized medical expenses incurred at Bethesda Memorial Hospital from January 5, 2010 to January 12, 2010 are eligible for reimbursement as the treatment was necessary due to an emergent gastrointestinal condition and VA facilities were not feasibly available.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded to obtain outstanding private treatment records and to schedule a VA examination. The increased rating claim for residuals of a laceration of the right ring and middle fingers with decreased extension and with ulnar nerve damage, loss of sensation, and decreased grip strength of the right upper extremity will be adjudicated after these actions.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's dermatophytosis does not meet the criteria for a compensable rating under the applicable VA rating criteria, and therefore denied his claim for an increased disability evaluation.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for a Travel Board hearing. The issue of entitlement to nonservice connected pension remains pending.

The Board finds that the appellant does not have qualifying service to establish basic eligibility for non-service-connected pension benefits, including special monthly pension (SMP). Therefore, his claim is denied.

The Board has determined that VA's determination to grant CHAMPVA benefits for the period from April 1, 2005 to July 1, 2010 was due solely to administrative error. Therefore, terminating eligibility during this period would not be proper.

The Board is requesting additional information and medical records to determine if the appellant was permanently incapable of self-support prior to his 18th birthday.