Other conditions decisions — 2022

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the nature and extent of the Veteran's exposure to asbestos during service, which is necessary for a proper determination on his claim for service connection for a respiratory disability.

The Veteran's appeal has been withdrawn by her, and thus the Board is dismissing the appeal for the issues of service connection for hallux valgus of the left foot, bilateral hammertoes, and fat pad atrophy of the bilateral feet.

The Board has remanded the case due to failure to substantially comply with its January 2020 remand directives. The Veteran's service connection claim for an umbilical/abdominal hernia will be reconsidered.

The Board has remanded the case due to missing VA medical records and requests for additional information. The Veteran's claim for service connection for a right elbow disorder is also on hold.

The Board has granted service connection for the Veteran's basal cell carcinoma, finding that it is at least as likely as not due to his active military service.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate VA medical opinions regarding direct and secondary service connection for a left knee disability. The Veteran's in-service knee pain and injuries need to be evaluated, along with his service-connected right knee and low back disabilities.

The Veteran's claim for Post-9/11 GI Bill educational assistance was denied as he did not have qualifying active duty service, specifically as a cadet at the USAFAPS.

The Board found that the overpayment was valid and denied the waiver of recovery due to fraud on the part of the Veteran.

The Board has remanded the case due to a failure to obtain private medical records from Dr. B.H. and Butler Memorial Hospital, which may contain relevant information for determining service connection.

The Board found that the Veteran did drill in October and November 2008, and he was paid for these days while receiving VA benefits. Therefore, an overpayment was created and denied.

The Board has remanded the case for further development to determine if R. qualifies as the Veteran's helpless child, given that the Veteran's representative argued this issue in their Appellant's Brief.

The appeal for service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death has been dismissed as the claim was granted in a March 2022 rating decision.

The Board has remanded the case due to a lack of clarity regarding whether the Veteran received notice of his scheduled VA examination, and because he had significant health conditions preventing him from attending. The Veteran's claim for service connection for stroke residuals will be reconsidered.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to inadequate medical opinions and failure to comply with prior remand directives. The Veteran's claim for service connection for a bilateral lower extremity vascular disability, which he contends is secondary to his service-connected conditions of eczema with urticaria, will be returned to the RO for further development.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection and rating of his right knee disability due to incomplete compliance with previous remand directives. The Veteran is required to provide updated VA treatment records, service personnel records, and vocational rehabilitation counseling records. An addendum opinion regarding the testicular disability and a VA examination for the right knee are needed.

The Board denied service connection for swelling of the lower extremities, finding that it did not originate in service and is not related to a service-connected disability.

The Board dismissed the appeal due to the appellant's request for withdrawal of the appeal prior to a decision being made.

The petition to reopen the claim for service connection for residuals, injury to left hand is granted. The Board also remanded the case for a VA examination and opinion regarding the relationship between the Veteran's current left hand disability and his in-service injury.

The Board has remanded the case due to an investigation into the appellant's claims for DIC reinstatement filed in early 1988, and to secure her complete military personnel file and service treatment records.

The Veteran died without service-connected disabilities, and thus is not eligible for nonservice-connected burial death benefits.