Other conditions decisions — 2019

The Board denied service connection for a right eye disorder, finding that the evidence does not support a nexus between the condition and active duty service or a service-connected left eye disability.,For his left eye disability, the Veteran received a separate 30% rating based on disfigurement of the left eye.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate compliance with previous remand directives and the need for additional VA examination and medical opinion regarding the Veteran's blood disorder, including myelofibrosis, allegedly caused by VA-administered Colchicine and Toradol in May 2011.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for right eye disability, finding that there is no evidence of a nexus between his current condition and military service.

The Board denied the reopening of a claim for service connection for a deviated septum because no new and material evidence was received to support the claim.

The Veteran's initial compensable rating for spermatocele, left testicular pain, s/p spermatocele removal is being remanded due to the need for an addendum opinion regarding nerve impairment and atrophy of both testicles.

The Board denied the reopening of the claim regarding the character of discharge as a bar to compensation benefits due to lack of new and material evidence.

The appeal for a compensable disability rating for the Veteran's left femoral neck fracture, for purposes of accrued benefits, has been dismissed as the Appellant withdrew his claim.

The Board dismissed the appeal for a waiver of indebtedness and denied entitlement to additional compensation for the Veteran's son and daughter as dependent children based on school attendance.

The Veteran's appeal for service connection of myelodysplastic syndrome was dismissed due to the death of the appellant.

The appeal for nonservice-connected death pension benefits as a surviving child of the Veteran has been dismissed because the benefits have already been granted in September 2018.

The Veteran's appeal for reimbursement of medical expenses incurred at Mitchell County Hospital on July 25, 2012 is granted because he has partial coverage under Medicare and received care at a VA facility within 24 months prior to the non-VA emergency treatment.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for additional VA treatment records and readjudication of his claim for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU).

The Board has determined that a remand is necessary to determine if the appellant was insane at the time of his misconduct in service, which caused him to be discharged under other than honorable conditions. The VA will obtain any outstanding treatment records and provide an opinion on this matter.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's family income exceeds the maximum annual disability pension limit for a Veteran with one dependent at the aid and attendance rate, even after considering his out-of-pocket medical expenses. The case is being remanded to allow the VA Pension Management Center (PMC) to prepare an audit of these expenses.

The Veteran's adopted grandson, M.S., is recognized as a dependent for VA purposes starting from May [redacted], 2017. The Veteran had previously been granted disability compensation and now qualifies for additional benefits due to the adoption.

The Board denied an earlier effective date for service connection of a right 5th metatarsal fracture, finding that the claim was filed on August 25, 2017 and no prior claims were received.

The Veteran's overpayment claim is being remanded due to the need for further review by the Committee on Waivers and Compromises regarding the validity of the debt and whether a waiver should be granted.

The appellant's appeal was denied because her Substantive Appeal, which she signed on June 3, 2013, was not filed within the required time limit and thus is considered untimely.

The Board denied the Veteran's appeal as her substantive appeal was not timely filed, and thus she did not have a valid appeal on the issue of service connection for fibroids tumors and hysterectomy.

The Veteran's service did not meet the requirements for a period of war, thus denying his pension claim.