Other conditions decisions — 2024

The Board has granted service connection for the Veteran's left upper lung nodule status post radiation therapy, finding that it manifested to a compensable degree after his separation from service and is not attributable to intercurrent causes. The decision is based on presumptive exposure to Agent Orange.

The Veteran's countable income exceeds the maximum annual pension rate (MAPR) for a veteran without dependents, thus denying the claim of nonservice-connected pension benefits.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to procedural errors in creating and notifying the Veteran of an overpayment debt. The AOJ must provide a detailed audit, correct any notification errors, and make a decision on whether the debt was properly created.

The Veteran's myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) is related to his in-service herbicide agent (Agent Orange) exposure and service connection for MDS has been granted.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for nonservice-connected survivor's pension benefits due to insufficient income and asset information provided, making her ineligible for these benefits.

The Veteran's service from May 6, 2004 to August 8, 2004 is not considered qualifying active duty for Post-9/11 GI Bill education benefits purposes due to being entry level and skills training.

The Board denied the Veteran's appeal as recoupment of his VA disability compensation for separation pay is proper due to lack of exceptions and combat-related findings.

The Board has remanded the case due to a pre-decisional duty to assist error regarding the Veteran's exposure to herbicide agents in service, specifically during his time stationed in Panama. The Veteran is diagnosed with AML and served in the Panama Canal Zone.

The Board has dismissed the appeal as no case or controversy remains due to the approval of the claim for VA payment of ambulance services provided by the appellant.

The Veteran's claim for a higher rating for his service-connected calcification in the anterior-posterior window and right lung/hilum with granulomas and mild restrictive lung defect is remanded due to inadequate VA examinations, including missing exercise capacity testing.

The Veteran's claims for payment or reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses provided by Southern Regional Anesthesia Consultants on October 10, 2020, and October 12, 2020, were denied because the claims were filed outside of the 90-day timely filing limitation.

The Board has granted service connection for right shoulder disability on a direct basis, finding that the evidence is at least evenly balanced as to whether the Veteran's right shoulder disability had onset in service.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical evidence and a need for further examination.

The Board has denied the appellant's claims for payment of non-VA medical expenses incurred on various dates in January and February 2021 due to a lack of VA authorization.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a dental/oral condition, finding that there is no current diagnosis of record and thus not meeting the criteria for compensation.

The Board dismissed the appeal as the VHA had already corrected and paid the underpayment of non-VA medical care provided by HHHC for the specified dates, resolving the issue in full.

The Veteran's application for Supplemental Service-Disabled Veterans Insurance (SRH) was denied because it was received after the statutory deadline of December 31, 2022. The Board found that the law is clear and cannot grant SRH applications after this date.

The Veteran's appeal for an earlier effective date of April 14, 2011, for the grant of service connection for costochondritis and Tietze syndrome (residuals of rib injury) is dismissed as the July 2024 rating decision implementing the Board's decision was not a decision that could be appealed.

The Board dismissed the appeal because it does not have jurisdiction to decide whether VA should pay for medical services provided by a non-VA provider.

The Board denied requests for earlier effective dates for recognition of the Veteran's spouse and children, finding that notification was not made within one year of the events.