Other conditions decisions — 2020

The Veteran's SMP benefits based on the need for aid and attendance are granted, as he is in need of regular aid and attendance due to documented unreimbursed medical expenses.

The Veteran's service-connected vision loss and post-phlebitic syndrome of the legs have been granted. The Veteran is awarded a 10 percent rating for his service-connected post-phlebitic syndrome of both legs from May 30, 2017 to September 23, 2019.

The Board has granted service connection for the Veteran's intercranial ossifying fibromyxoid tumor due to presumed exposure to herbicides during his active duty in Vietnam.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for nonservice-connected pension and special monthly pension based on need for aid and attendance or housebound status due to a lack of qualifying wartime service. The veteran did not have at least 90 days of active duty during a period of war, nor was he discharged from service due to a service-connected disability.

The Board dismissed the claim of entitlement to an initial disability rating in excess of 20 percent for compartment syndrome on the left because it is a final decision and cannot be revised.

The Board denied the Veteran's request to add his spouse as a dependent because he did not provide sufficient information regarding her prior marriage.

The Board dismissed the appeal because S.F. was removed as the Veteran's fiduciary for VA benefits, and there is no longer a case or controversy.

The Veteran's right eye cataract is rated at a 10 percent level, but the service connection for chronic fatigue syndrome remains remanded.

The Veteran's left hip brace causes wear and tear to her clothing, warranting a clothing allowance for the year 2019.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to ambiguities in the calculation of overpayment and potential underpayment issues. The Veteran's challenges include both the validity of the amount of his overpayment debt and the denial of a waiver of his overpayment debt.

The Board has remanded the case due to a duty to assist error, as the complete treatment records for the Veteran's July 17, 2019 care at Legacy Emanuel Medical Center are not available. The AOJ is instructed to attempt to obtain these records and associate them with the claims file.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to missing medical records and a duty-to-assist error. The AOJ needs to obtain additional VA medical records, including the informed consent form, perioperative note, and surgery report. A supplemental opinion from the VA examiner will be needed to determine if the complications were reasonably foreseeable.

The Board has remanded the case due to inconsistencies in the previous VA examination report and a need for additional medical records. The examiner is requested to provide an addendum opinion addressing whether any diagnosed psychiatric disorder is related to service, including the in-service stabbing incident.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient consideration of the Veteran's arguments regarding an earlier effective date for his increased rating for sebaceous cyst of the face.

The Veteran's CVA and residuals are granted as secondary to service-connected PTSD and diabetes mellitus.,The Veteran's alcoholism is granted as secondary to service-connected PTSD.,Special monthly compensation based on the need for aid and attendance of another person is granted.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate VA examination and opinion regarding service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability, including schizoaffective disorder and depressive type.

The Board has decided to remand the issues of entitlement to a compensable rating for right hip arthritis with loss of flexion and limitation of extension prior to November 15, 2019 due to insufficient evidence from the VA examination.

The Veteran's initial rating for degenerative joint disease of the left elbow was granted, but his claim for a skin disorder remains pending and will be remanded.

The Veteran's claim for additional respiratory disability and heart disability due to VA treatment is denied as there is no evidence of a qualifying additional disability.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to the need for clarification regarding whether the Veteran's in-service complaints of abdominal distress should be considered as symptoms of Crohn’s disease. The examiner must provide an opinion on the relationship between the Veteran's service, his service-connected cholecystectomy, and his current diagnosis of Crohn’s disease.