Other conditions decisions — 2019

The Veteran's unauthorized medical expenses incurred at a private hospital on May 5, 2014 are being remanded for additional development of the evidence and consideration of the most recent provisions regarding reimbursement for unauthorized medical expenses.

The Veteran's application for financial assistance for an adapted automobile and adaptive equipment, special monthly compensation based on need for aid and attendance of another person or housebound status, and additional compensation benefits for a dependent spouse prior to December 1, 2013 have all been denied due to lack of eligibility under the criteria set forth in VA regulations.

The Board denied termination of the appellant's nonservice-connected death pension benefits, finding that her income did not exceed the applicable maximum annual pension rate (MAPR). The decision was based on evidence showing she had received income in excess of $7,329 in 2006 and continued to do so.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for VA death benefits as she was not legally married to the Veteran at the time of his death, and thus cannot be considered his surviving spouse.

The Board is remanding the case to determine if the underlying debt was validly created and whether the request for waiver of recovery was received in a timely manner.

The Board is remanding the case to determine if the overpayment was properly created and whether the Appellant is entitled to a waiver of recovery.

The Veteran's claim for an initial compensable disability rating for degenerative joint disease of the interphalangeal joint and osteophyte removal of the right first toe is denied. The Board found that the symptomology more nearly approximates a mild foot injury.

The Veteran's only current dental disability is replaceable missing teeth, which are not compensable under VA regulations. Therefore, service connection for a dental disorder for compensation purposes is denied.

The Veteran's cause of death is being remanded for the VA to locate his complete service records and verify any overseas service prior to 1972, as it may be relevant to the claim.

The Board found that the appellant's dishonorable discharge was due to insanity at the time of commissioning offenses, and thus denied VA benefits based on this period of service.

The Board is remanding the claims for increased ratings for bilateral pterygium and conjunctivitis, as well as service connection for hearing loss and tinnitus. The Veteran's VA treatment records are incomplete, and he has not been examined by VA for his eye disabilities.

The Board denied the claim for service connection for cause of death, finding that ischemic cardiomyopathy was not caused by or aggravated by service-connected conditions.

The Veteran's death was in March 2014, and the appellant sought additional accrued benefits. The retroactive award due to the Veteran prior to his death was $5,943. However, the appellant has not provided evidence of expenses exceeding $1,275 for the Veteran's last sickness or burial. As a result, the appeal is denied.

The Veteran's varicose vein disabilities in both lower extremities are rated at 10 percent, and the Board has granted a higher rating of 40 percent based on persistent edema with stasis pigmentation or eczema with intermittent ulceration.

The Board denied an increased rating on an extraschedular basis for idiopathic central nervous system hyper-somnolence syndrome, finding that the available schedular ratings adequately covered the Veteran's disability picture.

The Veteran's initial compensable rating for left foot condition (status post fracture of the fourth metatarsal) is denied as there is no evidence of moderate impairment.

The Board has remanded the claims for service connection for splenectomy and abdominal surgical scar due to insufficient evidence regarding whether the Veteran's conditions are related to his military service, specifically whether they were aggravated by service or if they constitute congenital defects or diseases.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to a failure to issue a Statement of the Case (SOC) regarding his claim for service connection for a right eye disorder. The case will be returned to the Board only if he files a substantive appeal.

The Board found that the appellant did not have qualifying active duty service for purposes of a pension, and thus the termination of his nonservice-connected pension was proper.

The Board has decided to remand the case for an addendum VA opinion due to inconsistencies in the medical opinions provided.