Other conditions decisions — 2019

The Board denied the appellant's claim for recognition as a helpless child of her father due to insufficient evidence showing she was permanently incapable of self-support prior to age 18, despite having significant employment and educational history.

The Board denied the claim for DIC benefits as the appellant does not meet the basic eligibility requirements due to her disqualifying marriages, and thus precluded from being recognized as a helpless child of the Veteran.

The Board has remanded the case due to a conflict in the medical opinion regarding causation and proximate cause of the Veteran's atonic neurogenic bladder.

The Veteran's recurrent laryngitis is rated at a 10 percent disability effective August 11, 2009.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for CFS, which was initially claimed as fatigue, memory loss and difficulty in concentration, is granted. The Board finds that the Veteran has a current diagnosis of CFS that manifested during his active duty service, including due to his service in Southwest Asia.

The Veteran's service-connected varicose vein disabilities prevent him from securing and following any substantially gainful employment, and the Board grants a TDIU.

The Veteran's right and left foot disabilities, including hammer toes affecting multiple toes and metatarsalgia, are currently rated at 10% each. The appeal is denied as the evidence does not support a higher rating.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to issues with the creation and calculation of an overpayment of VA educational benefits under the REAP. The Veteran needs to provide updated financial information, and a detailed audit must be prepared to determine if the debt was properly created.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to determine if the Veteran's Hodgkin's Lymphoma is related to herbicide exposure during his service in Thailand. The Veteran should provide any evidence of duties that required him to be near the perimeter or fence line of the base (including on or near the flight line).

The Veteran died of Alzheimer’s Disease, which the Board found was not related to his service. The claim for service connection for cause of death is denied.

The Veteran's death was less than one year after the Appellant and Veteran entered into a ceremonial marriage. The Board found that their relationship did not meet the requirements for recognition as a surviving spouse due to lack of formal marriage, despite living together for over ten years.

The Veteran's claims for service connection, compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for a neck goiter, an enlarged prostate, and a growth on the left clavicle joint and neck are being remanded due to the complexity of the medical issues.

The Board denied the appellant's request for nonservice-connected survivor pension benefits due to her excessive net worth, which would consume part of her estate for maintenance. The Board found that under current circumstances, some part of the trust fund and mutual fund should be consumed for the appellant’s maintenance.

The Board has determined that the overpayment of compensation benefits in the amount of $37,158.00 was improperly created and must be reviewed before considering a waiver of indebtedness.

The Board has determined that the appellant needs to provide additional financial information before a decision can be made on her claim for nonservice-connected death pension.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to incomplete records and the need for additional VA treatment records, as well as a request for more information from the appellant regarding private medical records.

The Veteran's disability rating for conversion disorder was reduced from 100% to 50%, but the RO corrected this error and restored the original 100% rating.

The Board has reopened the Veteran's claims for service connection for residuals of left nephrectomy and right partial nephrectomy due to tumor/cancer, but remanded both issues for additional development.

The Board has determined that further development is necessary to determine if the Universidad de Granada in Spain meets the criteria for approving DEA benefits for J.A. III and C.A., who are pursuing education there.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to insufficient evidence regarding the accreditation of his son's school in Spain for VA purposes. The matter will be reconsidered after determining if the school meets the required standards.