Other conditions decisions — 2024

The Board has granted service connection for multiple myeloma, finding that the Veteran's condition is related to his military service.

The Veteran's overpayment of VA pension benefits is waived due to the hardship caused by his failure to report Social Security income and the resulting deficit in monthly expenses, which makes it difficult for him to afford basic necessities.

The Veteran's appeals for service connection for colon and liver cancer were dismissed due to their death.

The Veteran withdrew their appeal before the Board could make a decision, so the case is dismissed.

The Veteran's cause of death, colon cancer, is found to be related to his in-service asbestos exposure and thus service connection for the cause of death is granted.

The Board has granted effective dates of July 8, 2009 for the awards of service connection for dizziness and lightheadedness and persistent weakness and fatigue.

Your appeal for payment of non-VA medical care provided on March 22, 2018 has been dismissed as the claim was administratively approved by VA.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for hysterectomy, finding that there is no evidence to support a link between her hysterectomy and her military service.

The Veteran's claim for an increased rating and earlier effective date for service connection for narcolepsy was granted. However, the attorney representing the Veteran did not provide representation or services on these issues, so he is not eligible to receive fees based on past-due benefits awarded in the September 2021 rating decision.

The appeal for eligibility to participate in the Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers (PCAFC) is dismissed due to the Veteran's death.

The Veteran's appeal for a total disability rating due to individual unemployability (TDIU) has been dismissed as he formally requested to withdraw his appeal.

The Veteran's claim for an effective date earlier than December 12, 2016, for the award of service connection for unspecified trauma and stressor disorder is remanded due to a pre-decisional duty to assist error. The Board finds that a retrospective VA medical opinion is needed regarding whether the Veteran had a psychiatric disability prior to December 12, 2016, including at the time of filing his claim.

The Veteran's spouse, the appellant, is granted reimbursement of $2,000.75 for expenses related to her deceased husband's burial. The decision is based on evidence showing that she paid these expenses and that they were due and unpaid at the time of his death.

The Board has dismissed the appeals for payment of medical services provided by Aegis Sciences Corporation on September 3, 2020, September 17, 2020, and October 1, 2020, as these services were authorized through the Veterans Community Care Program (VCCP) and governed by statutory and contractual authority that does not allow for review by the Board.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate opinion regarding service connection for basal cell carcinoma, which is presumed associated with herbicide exposure.

The Veteran requested to withdraw their appeal, and the Board has dismissed it due to lack of allegations of errors in the determination.

The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for adding his daughter as a dependent due to service-connected disabilities was denied because he did not meet the threshold rating criteria prior to October 25, 2020. The effective date is set at October 25, 2020.

The Board has granted service connection for adjustment mood disorder as secondary to the Veteran's service-connected disabilities. Service connection for neurogenic bladder is remanded due to conflicting medical evidence.

The appeal for payment or reimbursement of non-VA medical services provided on December 13, 2020 is dismissed as the entity filing the appeal (US Acute Care Solutions) did not provide the services and is not a proper claimant.

The Board has dismissed the appeal because the issue of whether the contractual payment rate for home health services provided by the appellant in March 2020 is proper falls under a specific administrative dispute resolution process that does not allow for appellate review.