Other conditions decisions — 2026

The Board has dismissed the appeal as there is no case or controversy affecting the provision of benefits by VA over which the Board may exercise jurisdiction.

The Veteran's appeal was dismissed because her appeal to the VR&E benefits was premature as the feasibility of any particular employment goal or services had not yet been adjudicated by the VRC.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims of entitlement to a compensable disability rating for bowel incontinence and entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) due to insufficient evidence regarding the severity of his bowel incontinence. The case is being returned to the AOJ for further action.

The Veteran's application for PCAFC benefits is denied as his service-connected disabilities were incurred or aggravated after May 7, 1975, and before September 11, 2001. The claim is denied due to the timing of the application.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to a pre-decisional duty to assist error, requiring an updated Toxic Exposure Risk Activity (TERA) memorandum and a VA examination to determine if any prostate disability is related to service or exposure to hazardous materials.

The Board has granted earlier effective dates for service connection and ratings, with the Veteran receiving a 30% rating for hysterectomy from November 15, 2019, and separate 30% ratings for bilateral salpingectomy. The Veteran's claim for an initial compensable rating for Female Sexual Arousal Disorder (FSAD) is denied.

The Board dismissed the appeal of a proposed termination of SMP-AA survivor's pension benefits as premature and not ripe for appeal.

The Board has remanded the case due to pre-decisional duty to assist errors, including failing to request records from all appropriate agencies. The AOJ is instructed to contact relevant state and federal agencies to obtain any documentation pertaining to the Appellant's period of service in the Indiana National Guard, specifically verifying periods of active duty, ACDUTRA, and INACDUTRA, and determining if any claimed disorder is related to or aggravated by events during these periods.

The Veteran's genitourinary disability with voiding dysfunction is granted a 60 percent rating, erectile dysfunction is granted a noncompensable rating, and SMC for loss of use of a creative organ is granted.

The Board has remanded the case due to a duty-to-assist error and requests an addendum VA medical opinion to address all theories of entitlement and evidence of record.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for an apportionment of the Veteran's VA compensation benefits withheld during his period of incarceration, finding that she did not meet the criteria for individual need.

The Board has granted a 10 percent evaluation for mild obstructive lung disease (claimed as respiratory complaints) from December 7, 2018, but no earlier.

The Veteran's son is denied a VA home loan guaranty certificate of eligibility because the basic eligibility criteria have not been met.

The Board has remanded the claims for separate compensable ratings for bilateral upper extremity peripheral nerve disabilities due to a duty to assist error. The Veteran is seeking separate ratings for neuritis and neuralgia under Diagnostic Codes 8615 and 8715.

The Board has decided to remand the DIC claim due to errors in processing and a need for additional evidence. The appellant needs to provide copies of her prior claims, service treatment records, and relevant medical records.

The Board denied the claim for a government-furnished headstone or grave marker due to the service member not meeting the eligibility requirements for burial in a national cemetery, as he did not have active military service and was not discharged under conditions other than dishonorable.

The Board has decided to remand the matter of whether two overpayment debts ($7,524.00 and $210.26) were validly created by VA. The AOJ must provide a formal decision on this issue, explaining how the debts were created and calculated, including notification of the decision and rights to appeal.

The Board has determined that the eligibility determination for enrollment in the PCAFC program is legally inadequate and requires further review by the Centralized Eligibility and Appeals Team (CEAT). The CEAT must provide a new medical opinion regarding whether the Veteran requires personal care services, supervision or protection, or instruction based on his condition.

The Veteran's costochondritis and intercostal myalgia have been rated at a 10 percent disability level, reflecting moderate impairment of the muscles involved.

The Veteran's death prevented the completion of eligibility requirements for the PCAFC program, resulting in denial.