Other conditions decisions — 2019

The Board denied service connection for herpes because there is no evidence of a current disability or an event, injury, or illness in service.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for additional compensation for his dependent spouse, finding that the earliest effective date of claim was June 22, 2018. The decision is based on the fact that the Veteran did not submit the required documentation within one year from the notification letter.

The Board has granted service connection for a sleep disorder, to include idiopathic hypersomnia, finding that the Veteran's chronic idiopathic hypersomnolence is attributable to an undiagnosed Persian Gulf War illness. The decision resolves all doubt in favor of the Veteran.

The Board has remanded the pension claim for further development due to issues related to employment history and earnings, as well as potential new evidence from the Veteran's incarceration. The matter is inextricably intertwined with other claims including service connection for a broken nose and a mole on the middle back.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to incomplete medical records and a need for additional information from the appellant.

The Veteran's surviving spouse was already awarded $2,000 in burial benefits. The appellant cannot be awarded additional burial benefits as the surviving spouse has priority and VA will not divide applicable burial benefits.

The Veteran's death was not caused by any service-connected disability, and therefore the claim for service connection for the cause of his death is denied.

The appeal for service connection of a right great toe disability is dismissed due to the Veteran's death.

The Veteran's service-connected tonsillitis does not render him so helpless as to require the regular aid and attendance of another person, or cause him to be housebound.

The Veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of medical expenses incurred at Eliza Coffee Memorial Hospital (ECMH) from June 13, 2017, to June 18, 2017, is being remanded due to incomplete records and the need for a VA designated clinician to assess when the Veteran stabilized.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for toxic damage/chemical hypersensitivity, finding that there is no current diagnosis of this condition and preponderance of evidence against a finding of service connection.

The Board has remanded the claims for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for residuals of an orbital bone fracture and residuals of a right hand fracture, as well as the claim for TDIU due to the need for additional expert medical opinions.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal for service connection for sarcoma, and the Board dismissed it.

The Veteran's disability compensation benefits were withheld due to concurrent receipt of military drill pay for 72 days in FY 2009 and 80 days in FY 2011. The appeal is denied as the withholding was proper.

The Board has decided to remand the cases of service connection for vitiligo and trigeminal neuralgia due to lack of VA examination, incomplete medical records, and need for additional private treatment records. The Veteran should be provided another opportunity for a VA examination.

The Board has determined that there is insufficient evidence to establish service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death due to a metastatic neuroendocrine tumor, and remands the case for further development including obtaining an independent medical opinion.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient documentation regarding the Veteran's status and service between July 2008 and August 2011. The AOJ is instructed to inquire of relevant agencies/offices for additional records.

The Veteran's increased rating for bilateral rotator cuff tendonitis is remanded due to inadequate VA examination and failure to conduct range of motion testing during a flare-up.

The Veteran's daughter is seeking an earlier effective date for DIC benefits, but the appeal is remanded due to a lack of information regarding when her claim was filed with Social Security Administration (SSA).

The Board dismissed the issue of whether reduction of compensation payments due to incarceration was proper because no timely Substantive Appeal was received regarding this claim.