Other conditions decisions — 2020

The Board has remanded the case due to an overpayment of VA disability compensation benefits. The Veteran is not responsible for the debt as he did not intend to defraud the government and was confused about the situation.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to inadequate examination and lack of objective testing. The Veteran's eustachian tube disorder is being reviewed for a new medical opinion regarding its etiology.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient analysis regarding whether the liver condition is secondary to service-connected PTSD. The AOJ must obtain an addendum opinion addressing this issue.

The Board has decided to remand the cases for additional development and examination, including obtaining treatment records and scheduling a VA examination.

The Board has dismissed the claim for a total rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities (TDIU) as it was granted in full by a March 2020 rating decision.

The Board has restored the Veteran's entitlement to a Total Disability Rating Based on Individual Unemployability (TDIU) and Dependents' Educational Assistance benefits, effective October 1, 2019. The decision is based on evidence showing that the Veteran was not employed at the time of the previous termination.

The Board dismissed the Veteran's claims for earlier effective dates and special monthly compensation based on aid and attendance criteria.

The Veteran's acquired psychiatric disorder, specifically adjustment disorder with depressed mood, is now rated at 70 percent from November 21, 2014 to September 20, 2019. This higher rating reflects the severity of his symptoms and impairment in most areas.

The Veteran's claim for a higher rating for his laparotomy for lysis of adhesions was granted, and he is now rated at 20 percent. The claim for a compensable rating for his surgical scar status post laparotomy was denied.

The Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for a small bowel resection due to a GIST is being remanded as the Board finds that the question of whether VA failed to exercise the degree of care expected from a reasonable health care provider should be addressed by a gastroenterologist or oncologist.

The appellant's claim for recognition as the surviving spouse of the Veteran, for the purpose of entitlement to DIC benefits is denied due to the marriage not occurring within 15 years of the Veteran’s separation from military.

The Veteran's colorectal cancer and its residuals are found to be related to his in-service exposure to herbicide agents, specifically Agent Orange. Service connection is granted.

The claim for nonservice-connected death pension at a higher rate based upon having necessitated aid and attendance is denied due to the appellant's income exceeding the applicable Maximum Annual Pension Rate (MAPR). There are also concerns about the completeness of medical expense documentation.

The Veteran's claim for waiver of overpayment of dependent child benefits was denied because he misrepresented a material fact in his application to add dependents, leading to the creation of the $8,654.36 overpayment.

The Board has determined that the procedural steps for a simultaneously contested claim have not been completed, and thus the matter is remanded to ensure full compliance with the required procedures.

The Veteran's CVA palsy and feet condition are granted service connection, with the former being related to Agent Orange exposure. The hearing loss claim is remanded for further examination.

The Board has denied service connection for right and left foot disorders, but has remanded the issue of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder due to new evidence.

The Veteran's claim for nonservice-connected pension benefits is dismissed as her service-connected disability from September 3, 2015, provides a greater benefit than the pension.

The Veteran's appeal for a TDIU is remanded due to the need for updated information from his employer.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's in-service asbestos exposure contributed to his development of esophageal cancer, which ultimately led to his death from respiratory failure. The evidence is in equipoise as to whether this exposure caused or aggravated the esophageal cancer.