Other conditions decisions — 2023

The appeal was dismissed due to the Veteran's death, and no service connection issues were decided.

The Veteran's claim for a waiver of overpayment has been remanded due to issues with the validity of the debt and potential administrative error. The VA will need to conduct an audit, determine the validity of the debt, and then consider whether or not the Veteran should be granted a waiver.

The Veteran's right middle finger and right thumb tenosynovitis are rated at the maximum schedular rating under applicable criteria, with no indication of ankylosis or functional impairment that more nearly approximates amputation.,The Veteran's left foot condition is not service-connected due to lack of a recognized disability diagnosis.

The Veteran's bunion is being remanded for a VA examination to determine if it is at least as likely as not that the condition would be less severe and result in less functional impairment but for his service-connected left foot pes planus with bone spurs.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim of service connection for a gallbladder disorder, finding that there was no evidence linking his current condition to his active military service.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the onset and relationship of the Veteran's gastrointestinal disabilities to service.

The Board denied earlier effective dates for the noncompensable evaluation of left hip strain with impairment of flexion and the 20 percent evaluation of left hip strain with impairment of extension, finding that the evidence did not support an earlier effective date than September 8, 2021.

The Board has determined that the August 2021 decision denying eligibility for PCAFC benefits is legally inadequate and remands the case to provide adequate notice. Additionally, the claim must be remanded to obtain a new CEAT opinion regarding personal care services needs and to consider the eligibility criteria set forth in 38 U.S.C. § 1720G(a)(2)(C)(ii)-(iii).

The Veteran's urine retention, residuals of ablation of the posterior urethral valve surgery, from January 4, 2005, to April 27, 2010, is rated at the maximum schedular rating (60%) and thus no higher rating can be assigned.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to errors in VA's duty to assist and issues related to the Appellant's character of discharge. The AOJ must obtain relevant service treatment records, personnel files, and medical opinions regarding the Appellant's mental health at the time of misconduct.

The Board has remanded the cases for obtaining federal records from the Social Security Administration (SSA) and readjudicating the claims.

The Board has determined that new and relevant evidence has been received in relation to the Veteran's left and right foot conditions, and therefore, the claims are remanded for further development.

The Board has granted special monthly compensation based on the need for regular aid and attendance due to service-connected disabilities, including issues with medication management, hygiene needs, and dressing assistance.

The Veteran's eligibility for benefits under the VA Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers (PCAFC) is remanded due to a legally inadequate decision based on insufficient medical reasoning.

The Veteran's appeal for eligibility to the Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers (PCAFC) was dismissed as a matter of law due to his death, and there is no potential avenue by which eligibility could be granted.

The Veteran is seeking recognition of B.V. as a helpless child, and the Board has decided to remand this matter due to a pre-decisional error in not obtaining SSA records for B.V.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for post right hemicolectomy for tubulovillous adenoma (colon cancer) is being remanded due to the submission of new and relevant evidence. The Board finds that the Veteran may have been exposed to herbicide agents in Vietnam, which could potentially link his colon cancer to service.

The Veteran's claim for eligibility under VA's Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers (PCAFC) was denied. The Board has decided to remand the case due to a lack of adequate medical opinion and incomplete notice.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded to consider his claim for Total Disability Rating Based on Individual Unemployability (TDIU) as an element of the initial rating assigned for his service-connected Adjustment Disorder. The issue must be considered in light of Rice v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 447 (2009), and Akles v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 118 (1991).

The Veteran's eligibility for PCAFC benefits is remanded due to inadequate notification and a pre-decisional duty-to-assist error. The Board must provide proper notice under 38 U.S.C. § 5104, including identification of the issues adjudicated, evidence considered, applicable laws and regulations, findings favorable to the claimant, elements not satisfied leading to the denial, how to obtain or access evidence used in making the decision, and rights to a hearing, representation, and appeal.