Other conditions decisions — 2024

The Board has found that the original claim for payment or reimbursement of medical expenses was not filed within the required 90-day period and is remanding the case to locate missing records.

The appeal is denied as there was no VA authorization for the non-VA medical services provided on November 10, 2021.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's cause of death is due to presumed herbicide exposure during service in Vietnam, and a medical opinion is needed to determine if this exposure caused or contributed substantially to his cause of death.

The Board denied requests for earlier effective dates for service connection of left and right foot bunion conditions, finding that the Veteran did not file a valid claim prior to August 25, 2020.

The Board has dismissed the appeals regarding whether claims for reimbursement of home health services provided by the appellant were timely filed. The appeal is based on a Veterans Care Agreement (VCA) and does not involve service connection.

The appeal was dismissed as the claim for payment of non-VA dental services provided by a private provider has been resolved administratively.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to a pre-decisional duty to assist error, and further development is needed to determine whether the appellant's request for an upgrade to his discharge status has been addressed by the BCNR.

The Board has remanded the case due to an error in providing notice of her right to a pre-decisional hearing. The appellant is now required to be informed about this right.

The Board has dismissed the appeal as there is no provision for review of payment for non-VA medical services provided through the Veterans Community Care Program (VCCP). The appellant, Travis Co Emergency Physicians PA, was a provider within the VCCP network and the Veteran's authorization to receive services from this provider was valid.

The Veteran's income exceeded the VA National Means test threshold for 2022, thus he is not eligible for copay waiver in the VA healthcare system.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete consent documentation for the Veteran's medical procedures. The VA must obtain and associate all relevant informed consent documents, including those in the VISTA imaging system.

The Board has decided that the Veteran does not meet the eligibility requirements for PCAFC benefits due to a need for supervision, protection or instruction. The decision is being remanded for further review and clarification of the medical opinion.

The Veteran's service-connected deep vein thrombosis of the left calf and thigh resulted in symptoms such as aching and fatigue after prolonged standing or walking, which were relieved by elevation of the extremity. The Board granted a 10 percent disability rating for this condition.

The Veteran's appeal was dismissed due to their death during the pendency of the appeal.

The Veteran's cause of death was not service-connected, and there were no pending claims at the time of his death. The Board denied both the claim for service connection for the cause of death and the claim for accrued benefits.

The Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for a back injury was denied due to lack of evidence showing carelessness, negligence, or fault on the part of VA.,The Veteran's thoracolumbar spine disability was rated at 40 percent and not higher because it did not meet the criteria for an increased rating under Diagnostic Code 5237.

The Veteran's appeal for reimbursement of transportation expenses was dismissed as the Veteran withdrew the appeal before a decision could be made.

The Board dismissed the appeal as K.E. and L.E. were reestablished as dependent children for VA benefits effective May 1, 2021.

The Board has remanded the claims for service connection for myelofibrosis and anemia due to insufficient evidence regarding their relationship to Agent Orange exposure. A new VA medical opinion is needed to address this issue.

The Board has found the April 2021 VA medical opinion inadequate as it did not consider the Veteran's lay statements regarding an in-service injury. The Veteran is being remanded for a new examination and medical opinion to determine if his current left elbow disability is related to service.