Other conditions decisions — 2019

The Veteran's right and left foot corns have been rated at 10 percent since March 7, 2006. The Board found that the current symptoms do not warrant a higher rating as they are considered moderate.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for skin growths and non-healing skin lesions due to exposure to ionizing radiation, finding that new and material evidence had not been received.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for TDIU, finding that his employment was not marginal and did not constitute a protected environment prior to May 11, 2018.

The Board denied a request for an effective date prior to September 1, 2015, for the addition of the Veteran's spouse as his dependent to his VA compensation benefits. The decision states that no claim was received by VA within one year of the event and thus the earliest possible effective date is September 1, 2015.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to inadequate examination and need for further development of the record, including obtaining updated medical records and scheduling a VA examination.

The Veteran's death was not service-connected, and therefore the claim for burial benefits is denied.

The Board has determined that there is insufficient evidence to determine whether the Veteran's hypertensive cardiovascular disease warrants service connection and has therefore remanded for further examination.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claim for service connection for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) due to herbicide exposure, specifically Agent Orange. The Veteran served in Okinawa, Japan and there is evidence suggesting he was exposed to Agent Orange at Kadena Air Base.

The Veteran's funeral and burial expenses were paid by V.N., not the appellant. Therefore, the claim for burial benefits is denied.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for an arthritis disorder, including psoriatic arthritis affecting all joints, is remanded due to the need for a VA examination to determine if his condition began during service or within one year of discharge.

The Veteran's death was not service-connected, and therefore the claim for burial benefits is denied.

The Board denied the Veteran's petitions to reopen his previously denied claims for service connection for pulmonary embolism and umbilical hernia, finding that new and material evidence was not received.

The Board denied the Veteran's request for a waiver of overpayment due to receiving additional VA compensation benefits after his divorce, finding no fault on the Veteran's part and that recovery would not be against equity and good conscience.

The Board has remanded the case for further development due to the need for additional VA examinations and consideration of the Veteran's reported flare-ups.

The Veteran's right hand disability worsened after a VA surgery in July 2008, but the Board found that the carelessness or negligence of the VA was not the cause. The decision denies compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151.

The Veteran's appeal for a higher housing allowance was denied as the VA Regional Office correctly classified his enrollment as distance learning, entitling him to $603.60 per month during the online portion of his training.

The Board granted the appellant's claim for service connection for the cause of death, finding that the Veteran's AML was related to his active duty service and granting a grant of service connection.

The Veteran's claim for additional reimbursement of travel expenses associated with dental treatment at the West Haven, Connecticut, VA Medical Center in 2013, 2015, and 2017 is remanded due to missing relevant documentation.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to uncertainty regarding the relationship between the Veteran's gastrointestinal disability and his service. The Veteran needs a medical examination to clarify this issue.

The Board denied the request to reopen the claim of service connection for the cause of the Veteran’s death, as well as entitlement to survivor pension benefits and accrued benefits. The decision was based on the Appellant's income exceeding VA's maximum annual pension limit.