Other conditions decisions — 2019

The Veteran's income exceeded the maximum annual pension rate, so he is not eligible for nonservice-connected pension benefits.

The Veteran's neurosyphilis, spine disability and bilateral leg disabilities are remanded for further examination to determine their etiology.

The Veteran's request for a waiver of overpayment of VA compensation benefits was denied because it was not filed within the 180-day period following notification of indebtedness.

The Veteran's non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma is a radiogenic disease under VA regulations, but the claim must be remanded for further development due to incomplete information about exposure and lack of a VA examination.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for nonservice-connected death pension benefits from January 1, 2011 due to her income exceeding the maximum annual pension rate (MAPR).

The Veteran's joint pain, including fibromyalgia, back pain, and right hip pain, has not been shown to be related to service. Therefore, the claim for service connection is denied.

The Board has remanded this case due to the need for a VA examination to determine if the Veteran has loss of use of his right foot, which is required for special monthly compensation (SMC).

The Veteran died in 1884, before November 1, 1990. The VA does not have authority to provide a government-furnished headstone or marker for a privately-marked grave of a veteran who served prior to that date.

The Veteran's son, P.B., was in receipt of DEA benefits prior to and after turning 18 years old. The claim for concurrent payment of DEA benefits and dependency compensation is denied due to the prohibition on duplication of benefits.

The Board has remanded the case due to a need for a VA examination to determine if the Veteran's essential tremor is related to his service-connected anxiety disorder and/or herbicide exposure.

The Veteran's daughter does not qualify for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1805 or 38 U.S.C. § 1815 because she has not been diagnosed with spina bifida and her mother is not a Vietnam veteran.

The Veteran's appeal for an increased rating for his right eye condition and TDIU is being remanded due to the need for additional records and issuance of a Statement of the Case.

The Board denied service connection for a pulmonary disability and left leg disability, finding that the evidence did not support a link to military service or exposure to herbicides.

The Board denied the claim for an effective date prior to January 25, 2013 for the award of an aid and attendance allowance for B.R.S., finding that no claim was received prior to this date.

The Veteran's claim for an effective date prior to November 1, 2014, for the award of dependency benefits for her child G.Q. was denied as there is no evidence that she received notification about the existence of her child and the impact on her VA compensation benefits.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical evidence on whether the Veteran's back injury during service is related to his current disability.

The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for service connection of dysthymic disorder and a higher rating for the disability were both denied. The Board found that the Veteran did not file a formal or informal claim prior to September 26, 2016, which was when his service connection claim was received by VA.

The Veteran's claims of service connection for various foot and upper extremity conditions have been reopened, but the new evidence does not establish that these conditions are related to his military service. The claim for femur disability remains denied.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for right-hip disorder, finding that there was no evidence of a disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service and that arthritis did not manifest within one year of separation from service.

The Board denied a total disability rating based on individual unemployability and special monthly compensation for being housebound. The Veteran argued that there was CUE in the decision, but the Board found no clear and unmistakable error.