Other conditions decisions — 2019

The Veteran's Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits were exhausted, preventing the appellant from transferring any of these benefits to her for use during the Summer 2015 semester. The Board denied the claim as a matter of law.

The Board is remanding the case to obtain the appellant's complete service personnel records and service treatment records.

The Board denied DIC benefits as the remarried widow of the deceased Veteran due to her remarriage after the Veteran's death, which is generally a bar to eligibility for status as a surviving spouse.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings of her service-connected scoliosis, left tibial stress fracture, right femoral stress fracture, and cholecystectomy have all been denied.,There is no effective date earlier than March 28, 2014, for the increased rating of 20 percent for scoliosis of the thoracic spine.

The Veteran's claim for a total disability evaluation based on individual unemployability (TDIU) prior to May 13, 2008 was denied as she had full-time employment until that date.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings for varicose veins of the right and left lower extremities have been remanded due to the need for additional development. The matter of entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) due to service-connected varicose veins has also been raised, but must be addressed by the AOJ after giving the Veteran an opportunity to provide information and evidence pertinent to this claim.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for aortic stenosis with aortic valve replacement, finding that there was no evidence of exposure to rheumatic fever or herbicide agents during service and no nexus between any current disability and in-service events.

The Veteran's SMC for loss of use of a creative organ is granted as of April 1, 2005.

The Board has determined that a VA examination is needed to determine the nature and etiology of any basal cell carcinoma, including whether it is related to in-service herbicide agent exposure.

The Veteran's claim for Chapter 30 educational assistance benefits is denied as he did not meet the eligibility criteria due to a general discharge under honorable conditions, which does not qualify him for this program.

The Board has determined that the AOJ did not properly notify ES and AS of the Appellant's substantive appeal, so the case is being remanded for further action.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal at a hearing on July 26, 2018.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for restoration of death pension benefits due to her income exceeding the statutory maximum annual rate, as she received $14,854 in a 12-month period from Social Security Administration (SSA) and had medical expenses totaling $3,942. The Board found that her income was too high to allow for the payment of a death pension.

The Veteran's death was found to be due to acute myeloid leukemia, which the VA medical expert opined was likely caused by exposure to radiation from x-rays taken of service-connected disabilities and contaminated groundwater at Fort Eustis. The claim for service connection for the cause of death is granted.

The Board has remanded the cases due to uncertainty about whether the Veteran's rectal carcinoid tumor and liver disability are related to his service, including presumed exposure to herbicides in Vietnam.

The Veteran's cause of death is denied as there is no evidence to support service connection for the cause of his death.

The Board has remanded the cases for further development and clarification of diagnoses, as well as opinions regarding service connection.

The Veteran's cause of death is denied as there is no evidence linking his service-connected disabilities to the cause of his death, which was pneumonia due to (or as a consequence of) stroke.

The Board denied the waiver of an overpayment of death pension benefits due to remarriage, finding no fraud or bad faith on the part of the appellant and that collection would not be against equity and good conscience.

The appellant is denied recognition as the surviving spouse for purposes of receiving death pension benefits due to her subsequent marriage ending in divorce.