Other conditions decisions — 2017

Your appeal has been dismissed because the Veteran died during the pendency of your case.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's interstitial lung disease is related to in-service exposure to asbestos, and thus service connection for this condition is granted. However, there is no credible evidence linking his cognitive disability to service.

The Veteran's death was caused by metastatic pancreatic cancer, which the VA Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) found to be a radiogenic disease. The Board accepted that the Veteran was exposed to ionizing radiation during his service in Japan and concluded that he died from this condition.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's unauthorized medical expenses incurred on May 27, 2013 at SGHS were timely filed and meet the criteria for payment or reimbursement due to an emergent condition.

The appellant has withdrawn all issues currently certified to the Board, and thus the appeal is dismissed.

The Board has determined that the Appellant and the Veteran were divorced at the time of the Veteran's death, and therefore does not meet the criteria for surviving spouse status.

The Veteran's appeal was dismissed due to the death of the appellant, and thus there are no merits for adjudication.

The Veteran and the Appellant were married in August 2007. The Appellant filed a claim for an increase in February 2011, but her financial need was not demonstrated. After September 2011, the Appellant claimed she is still married to the Veteran despite their divorce being finalized, which is denied as lacking legal merit.

The Board found that the overpayment of Post-9/11 GI Bill educational assistance benefits was a valid debt and denied the Veteran's claim for waiver of recovery.

The Veteran's claims for squamous cell carcinoma of the right ear and pulmonary emphysema have been granted as they are presumed to be associated with mustard gas exposure during World War II.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for malaria was denied in March 1962. He did not appeal this decision and it became final. The Veteran filed a petition to reopen his claim on August 1, 2013, which resulted in the grant of service connection for malaria with an effective date of August 1, 2013.

The Veteran's bilateral nuclear sclerotic cataracts have not been linked to his service-connected hypertension, and the Board finds that he does not meet the criteria for service connection on a secondary basis.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's pre-existing low back condition did not undergo an increase in severity beyond its natural progression during active service, and therefore does not meet the criteria for service connection.

The Veteran's service-connected right foot disability, when combined with other disabilities, does not preclude him from securing and following all forms of substantially gainful employment. The Veteran is entitled to a 30 percent evaluation for his right foot disability.

The Veteran's appeal for additional educational benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill (Chapter 30) is denied as he has no legal entitlement to more than 26 months and 25 days of benefits.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining a copy of the August 2008 PFT report. The Veteran's claim remains pending and will be reconsidered after this additional development.

The Board found that there is no current diagnosis of a disability manifested by short-term memory loss and attributed the Veteran's symptoms to personality traits, stress, poor sleep, and somatic complaints. Therefore, service connection for this condition cannot be granted.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for a right hip disorder was denied as there is no evidence of a current diagnosis or etiology related to his service. His left knee disability does not meet the criteria for an evaluation in excess of 10 percent based on limitation of motion, and he does not have instability warranting a higher rating.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for increased ratings for his right and left knee disabilities, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating based on limitation of motion or arthritis.

The Board has remanded the case due to new evidence submitted by the Veteran, and further review is needed before a decision can be made on the service connection claims for left and right lower extremity skin disabilities.