Other conditions decisions — 2014

The Board denied the appellant's claim for VA death benefits due to a lack of qualifying service, as determined by the U.S. service department.

The Veteran's non-college degree program at United Theological Seminary and Bible College was not approved for Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits because it did not meet the requirements of an institution of higher learning.

The Board found that the reduction from a 100 percent evaluation to a 10 percent evaluation for laryngeal carcinoma was proper based on the absence of active disease, local recurrence, or metastasis. The Veteran's residuals included hoarseness, dyspnea, and difficulty swallowing.

The Veteran's spouse, the appellant, was not granted educational assistance benefits under Chapter 35 of Title 38 because her application for DEA benefits was received after the expiration of her eligibility period. The RO denied her claim as she did not file a claim to extend the delimiting date within one year of February [redacted], 2005, due to insufficient medical evidence showing that her back disability prevented her from pursuing education during her period of eligibility for Chapter 35 benefits.

The appeal has been dismissed due to the death of the appellant, and the Board does not have jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of this case.

The Board found that the Veteran's atonic neurogenic bladder was not caused by VA treatment and denied his claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151.

The Veteran's loss of vision in the left eye is not deemed to be caused by VA care, and thus compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 is denied.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for residuals of burns to the thorax and cornea is denied as there is no current disability found in the medical evidence.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's ulcer condition and stomach condition are not related to service, including Agent Orange exposure.

The Board finds that the evidence is at least in equipoise as to whether the Veteran's bilateral knee disabilities were caused by his military service, including his duties as a drill instructor. As such, service connection for these disabilities is granted.

The Veteran's symptoms of numbness and poor circulation in the left arm and hand are considered part of his already service-connected residuals of fracture of the distal left radius, with disruption of the distal radial ulnar joint and un-united fracture of the left lower ulnar. Therefore, he is not entitled to separate service connection for this condition.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for a new VA examination and updated treatment records, as well as consideration of his claim for TDIU.

The Board has granted a separate 10 percent rating for instability of the right knee and confirmed the current 10 percent rating for arthritis, but denied any additional ratings based on scars or other conditions.

The Veteran withdrew his claim for specially adapted housing, and the Board has dismissed the appeal.

The Board has determined that the appellant's request for waiver of recovery of an overpayment of VA death pension benefits in the amount of $3,743 was timely filed. The appeal is granted on this basis.

The Veteran's hair loss condition is not service-connected as it does not have a direct link to his military service. The VA examiner concluded that the current androgenetic alopecia is not caused by or related to the hair loss documented in service.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has not been received to reopen the claim of service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death. The appellant contends that exposure to Agent Orange, radiation, or Meniere's disease caused his glioblastoma multiforma and pulmonary emboli.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's colon cancer was incurred during service and grants service connection for this condition.

The Board finds that the appellant's marriage to the Veteran is invalid due to a legal impediment, and thus she may not be recognized as his surviving spouse for VA benefits.

The Board denied the appellant's claims of entitlement to VA DIC benefits and basic eligibility for accrued benefits as he did not meet the criteria for being a child of the Veteran under VA regulations.