Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has remanded the issues of service connection for bilateral knee disability and cervical spine disability (claimed as neck condition) due to a service-connected right foot strain. The current rating for right foot strain remains at 10 percent.

The Board has dismissed the appeal as no further action is needed since the appellant was informed of the approval and how to obtain payment for ambulance services provided on June 10, 2020.

The appeal seeking payment for home health services provided to the Veteran is dismissed because the dispute process under Veterans Care Agreements does not allow for Board review.

The Board dismissed the appeal for payment of non-VA home health services provided to the Veteran, as the dispute process under Veterans Care Agreements does not include review by the Board.

The Board denied an earlier effective date for the award of Total Disability Rating Based on Individual Unemployability (TDIU) as it was filed after April 2, 2021 and there were no prior pending claims.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for nonservice-connected survivor's pension benefits due to her income exceeding the maximum annual pension rate (MAPR). The appellant did not meet the specific income requirements to be eligible for survivor's pension benefits as a surviving spouse of the Veteran.

The Board has determined that the overpayment of Chapter 33 (Post-9/11 GI Bill) housing benefits in the calculated amount of $2,496.59 was not validly created due to sole VA error. As such, the appeal is granted.

The Board has granted service connection for the appellant's tongue cancer, finding that it is likely related to his service-connected major depressive disorder.

The Board has remanded the claims of service connection for hyperlipidemia, anal dysplasia, lipodystrophy, and organ damage, all secondary to HIV. The Veteran is not entitled to service connection for hyperlipidemia as it is a laboratory finding and not a disability eligible for VA compensation.

The Veteran is competent to handle the disbursement of VA funds and his competency has been restored.

The Board has granted service connection for bradycardia as secondary to the Veteran's service-connected hypertension.

The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for service connection for residuals of a transient ischemic attack (TIA) as secondary to his service-connected supraventricular arrhythmia (SVT). The decision is based on medical evidence that links the TIA to the Veteran's atrial fibrillation, which is part of his service-connected SVT.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to incomplete medical evidence and a need for clarification on whether the Veteran's service-connected disabilities alone precluded substantial gainful employment prior to July 1, 2015.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for further development due to issues related to his benign prostatic hypertrophy.

The Court found that the Veteran's pre-existing right hip condition was aggravated by service and progressed to arthritis, leading to a grant of service connection for the right hip disability.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to new evidence being submitted after the initial decision and before the appeal was returned to the Board. The Veteran's claim for service connection for joint pain (previously reactive arthritis) will be reconsidered with consideration of the newly received VA treatment records.

The Board has granted service connection for TMJ with bruxism, but denied service connection for eye disability, including Fuch's eye dystrophy. The issues of entitlement to TDIU and the remanded claims are pending.

The Veteran's claim for increased ratings for his right hip disability is being remanded due to the need for a new retrospective medical opinion addressing the severity of his condition from April 2006 to August 2020.

The Veteran's current stomach disability, diagnosed as lactose intolerance, is a progression of symptoms reported in service. The Board finds that the criteria for service connection are met.

The Board has remanded the case due to new evidence received after a previous denial, and a VA medical opinion is needed regarding the onset of the Veteran's supraventricular tachycardia.