Other conditions decisions — 2026

The Board has decided to remand the claims for a rating higher than 20 percent for residuals of fracture of left tibia and fibula, as well as the claim for TDIU on the basis of a single service-connected disability due to scheduling issues. Additional development is required.

The Veteran withdrew the appeal, and as a result, the case is dismissed.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and TDIU are being remanded due to the inadequacy of prior examination reports. The Board requires additional retrospective findings from an appropriate clinician to determine the severity of his service-connected chronic gastritis without the beneficial effects of medication.

The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for service connection for psoriatic arthritis, finding that her symptoms during service are more likely than not related to her current condition.

The Board has remanded the cases for further development and review due to conflicting opinions regarding the etiology of the Veteran's cerebrovascular accident, bilateral eye disorder, and hypertension. The case will be reviewed on a de novo basis as a result of the PACT Act.

The Board denied service connection for a gastrointestinal disorder, finding that the Veteran's current condition was not shown in service and is not related to military service.

The Board denied service connection for generalized alopecia as there was no in-service occurrence and no evidence linking the condition to service.

The Board has granted service connection for a skin disorder, including basal cell carcinomas and actinic keratoses, finding that the Veteran's current condition is related to his military service.

The Veteran's appeal for benefits under VA's Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers (PCAFC) is dismissed because his eligibility has been extended until September 30, 2025.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for additional VR&E benefits under Chapter 31, Title 38, United States Code because his case was properly discontinued due to achieving maximum rehabilitation gain (MRG) status. The evidence showed that the Veteran had completed training and obtained degrees and certifications relevant to employment.

The Board has decided that the Veteran is not eligible for PCAFC benefits due to lack of personal care services. The case is being remanded to correct a pre-decisional error in providing notice and to evaluate eligibility under the correct statutory criteria.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for a malignant brain tumor is remanded due to the AOJ's failure to forward records of potential radiation exposure in service to the Under Secretary for Health. The case will be referred back to VA's Under Secretary for Benefits for an opinion on whether it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran's brain tumor resulted from exposure to ionizing radiation during active service.

The Veteran's claim for reimbursement of non-VA emergency medical expenses incurred on November 27, 2024 was granted in full. The appeal is dismissed as the issue has been resolved.

The appeal for a TDIU effective date earlier than March 7, 2023 has been dismissed due to the Veteran's death.

The Board has already addressed the issue of an earlier effective date for SMC in a previous decision and dismissed this appeal as duplicative.

The Board has identified a duty-to-assist error and is remanding the case to correct it, including obtaining a legally adequate medical decision from the Centralized Eligibility and Appeals Team regarding eligibility for PCAFC benefits.

The Board has determined that the eligibility determination for PCAFC is not supported by sufficient evidence and requires further review, including a new medical opinion.

The Board dismissed the appeal of the February 2025 fee decision because the appellant did not file a valid appeal, and as a result, the Veteran was not adversely affected by the decision.

The Board has decided that the VA did not obtain all of the Veteran's service treatment records, including pre- and post-deployment health assessments. The claim is being remanded to correct this error.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal for service connection of sleep disorders before the Board could make a decision.