Other conditions decisions — 2020

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for enlarged prostate issues with bladder incontinence, finding no evidence of a current disability or a link to service, including exposure to Agent Orange.

The Board has decided that the propriety of creating overpayments for drill pay in FYs 2017 and 2018 is remanded due to incomplete information.

The Board has decided that the change in the Veteran's means test eligibility requirement from copay exempt to pharmacy copay for income year 2017 was not proper and has remanded the case for further action.

The Veteran's claim for an initial compensable rating for left middle finger is remanded due to a duty to assist error. The Board requires the Veteran to be provided with a VA examination to assess the severity of his disability and whether pain might result in limited motion.

The Board has remanded the case due to a pre-decisional error in not obtaining a medical opinion on the etiology of the diagnosed dextroscoliosis and mild degenerative thoracic spondylosis. The Veteran's back condition is related to service, but it was aggravated by a service-connected disability.

The Board has remanded the case due to a lack of opinion regarding whether supraventricular arrhythmia is aggravated by service-connected renal disease with hypertension, including coronary artery disease.

The Board has decided that the termination of apportionment benefits to the appellant was improper and has granted reinstatement of these benefits in the amount of dependency benefits received by the Veteran for the appellant. The decision also grants an increased apportionment, but only if it does not cause undue hardship.

The Board denied the Veteran's appeal for a TDIU due to lack of timely notice of disagreement (NOD). The NOD was submitted by the Veteran's attorney on September 17, 2019, but it was noted that neither the Veteran nor his attorney had received the January 6, 2018 rating decision and notification letter. However, there is no clear evidence to support their claim of non-receipt.

The Board denied service connection for a disability manifested by oral surgery, finding that the evidence did not support a claim and that the Veteran's lay statements were not competent to offer an opinion on the nature or etiology of his current disorder.

The Veteran's claim for service-connected burial benefits was denied as the appellant had not incurred expenses related to the funeral and burial of the Veteran.

The Veteran's appeal for service connection for pancreatic cancer was dismissed due to the death of the appellant, as the Board has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of this appeal at this time.

The appellant requested withdrawal of the appeals for past-due benefits awarded in April and May 2019, which were dismissed as per the appellant's request.

The Board dismissed the appeal because the March 2020 rating decision was only a proposal of a finding of incompetency, not a final decision on the matter.

The Board dismissed the appeal because the Veteran withdrew it before a decision was made.

The Board has dismissed the appeal as the appellant's representative requested to withdraw the appeal.

The Board dismissed the Veteran's appeal of his education benefits claim under the Post 9/11 GI Bill as he withdrew the appeal prior to a decision.

The Board has granted service connection for right humerus, right hip flexion, and right hip impairment. The Veteran's cash payment was reduced due to retired pay, but the Appellant is entitled to full attorney fees of 20% based on past-due benefits awarded.

The overpayment of VA compensation benefits was properly created due to a retroactive reduction in the compensation rate to the 10 percent rate as of the 61st date of the Veteran’s felony conviction, resulting in an overpayment. The appeal is denied.

The Board has decided to remand the cases for further medical evaluation and opinion regarding the right hip disorder and heat injury with elevated body temperature.

The Board has granted service connection for a gastrointestinal disorder but remanded the skin disorder claim due to inadequate medical opinions.