Other conditions decisions — 2020

The Board denied entitlement to a compensable disability rating for the service-connected residuals of a 4th and 5th metacarpal fractures and traumatic arthritis of the right hand, finding that there is no legal entitlement to such ratings based on the current evidence.

The Veteran's claims for service connection were previously denied, and the Board is denying his claim for special monthly compensation based on need for aid and attendance as he does not have a service-connected disability.

The Board has decided that another remand is necessary to determine the cause of death and its relation to military service, including Agent Orange exposure.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a bilateral swollen leg disability, finding that there is no current disability related to service and that the evidence does not establish a medical nexus between any current condition and service.

The Veteran's right fifth metatarsal fracture is rated at 10 percent, the minimum rating available under VA regulations. The Board found that the evidence does not support a higher evaluation.

The Veteran's service-connected left clavicle fracture residuals do not meet the criteria for a rating in excess of 20 percent. Service connection for arthritis in both arms is denied.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate medical opinion regarding the relationship between the Veteran's current skin condition and his service, including herbicide exposure.

The Board denied the Veteran's request for a waiver of overpayment of Veterans Retraining Assistance Program (VRAP) benefits, finding that recovery would not be against equity and good conscience due to personal hardship. The Veteran was found at fault in creating the overpayment by attending school less than full-time.

The Veteran's cause of death was granted retroactive service connection for the purpose of entitlement to retroactive benefits, and an effective date of November 15, 1998 is granted.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for brainstem glioma has been reopened due to the submission of new and material evidence. The case is remanded for a VA opinion regarding the nature and etiology of the Veteran's brainstem glioma.

The appellant requested to withdraw her claim for special monthly pension benefits on an accrued basis, and the Board dismissed it as a result.

The Board has remanded the cases for further adjudication due to their inextricability with another ongoing appeal.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete records and a need for a VA medical opinion regarding whether the Veteran's inclusion body myositis (IBM) is related to his military service, specifically his asserted environmental hazard/chemical/tainted water exposures.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the inclusion of new VA treatment records not previously considered in the decision. The Board cannot consider these records without a proper SSOC, so the case must be returned for that purpose.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for increased ratings and service connection due to inadequate medical opinions regarding the right elbow disability, eye disability, bilateral knee disabilities, and left ankle disability. The issues have been remanded for further development including obtaining new medical opinions.

The Veteran's adjustment disorder with depressed mood and alcohol use disorder resulted in occupational and social impairment, but not total social impairment. The Board denied an increased rating as the evidence did not support a finding of total social impairment.

The Board has remanded the claims for bilateral lower extremity chronic venous insufficiency and lower extremity scars due to missing service treatment records. A VA examination is needed to determine if the Veteran's current conditions are related to his active service.

The Board has remanded the case due to uncertainty regarding whether the Veteran has ever had a stroke and needs an addendum opinion from a medical professional.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to the need for additional examinations and records review, as well as clarification of which issues are being appealed.

The appeal for death pension benefits is dismissed because the appellant died during the pendency of her appeal, and the Board has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of the claim.