Other conditions decisions — 2015

The Veteran's claim for service connection for paroxysmal atrial flutter/fibrillation, status post-radio frequency ablation is being remanded due to the need for a new VA examination and consideration of his Persian Gulf Veteran status.

The Veteran's appeal has been withdrawn by the appellant and his representative prior to a decision being made.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings for peripheral vascular disease of the right and left lower extremities, as well as his TDIU claim, were denied. The evidence did not meet the criteria for a higher disability rating in either case.

The Board found new and material evidence to reopen the claim for service connection for a low back disability, but denied the claims for right and left knee disabilities due to lack of relevant medical evidence. The Veteran's current lumbago was not related to her military service.

The Board has determined that the appellant's income exceeded the maximum annual pension rate (MAPR) of $7,933 as of July 1, 2011, and thus termination of non-service-connected death pension benefits was proper.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's countable income exceeds the maximum annual disability pension limit set by law, but his need for aid and attendance is established. The case is being remanded to conduct an audit of unreimbursed medical expenses and income calculations.

The appellant's enrollment for the Spring 2013 term at the Community College of Philadelphia did not meet the requirement for full-time status, and therefore he is not entitled to payment of Dependents' Educational Assistance (DEA) benefits at the full time attendance rate.

The Veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of private medical expenses for services performed at Munroe Regional Medical Center on February 8, 2013 is denied as the treatment was not for an emergency condition and VA facilities were feasibly available.

The appeal is being remanded due to issues related to the effective dates for apportionment of the Veteran's VA disability benefits for his spouse and the reduction of his VA disability benefits. The case must be adjudicated again after resolving these issues.

The Veteran's claim for payment of unauthorized medical expenses was denied because they had coverage under Medicare Parts A and B, which constitutes a legal bar to reimbursement.

The Board found that the evidence was in equipoise and granted service connection for adenocarcinoma, finding it likely related to herbicide exposure during service.

The Veteran's claim for a higher initial disability rating for postoperative residuals of pilonidal cystectomy was denied. The appeal regarding the effective date and whether there was CUE in the December 7, 1999 decision is pending.

The Veteran's service-connected bilateral patellofemoral pain syndrome has been rated at 10 percent for each knee. The Board found that the limitation of motion caused by the disability warrants a noncompensable rating in both knees, but did not disturb the already assigned 10 percent ratings based on complaints of pain and additional functional loss.

The Board has remanded the case due to issues with TDIU and a VA Aid and Attendance examination. The claim for SMC based on aid and attendance or at the housebound rate is inextricably intertwined with the entitlement to a TDIU.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral eye disability is secondary to his service-connected hypertension and has granted service connection for this condition.

The Board found that the Veteran's hyperintense brain lesions are not a disability and thus do not warrant service connection.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for higher ratings for residuals of bilateral mandible fractures and bilateral renal cysts, finding that the evidence did not support a rating in excess of 10 percent for the mandible fractures or any compensable rating for the renal cysts.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for issuance of a statement of the case regarding the propriety of the effective date for apportionment of the Veteran's VA disability benefits to his spouse.

The Board found that the Veteran's death was not caused by VA's failure to diagnose and treat his preexisting conditions, but rather by an underlying infection.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral deep venous insufficiency is not related to his active service, and therefore denied his claim.