Other conditions Board decisions

The Board granted an earlier effective date of November 8, 1997 for the award of service connection for a heart murmur due to clear and unmistakable error in a March 1998 rating decision.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for veteran status, finding that they do not meet the legal definition of a veteran and thus are not eligible for VA benefits.

The Board dismissed the appeal of the proposed reduction of the Veteran's VA disability compensation benefits based on his felony incarceration as the Veteran did not submit a notice of disagreement.

The Veteran's spouse and child were removed as dependents due to failure to verify dependency status. After the Veteran confirmed his dependency status, they were reinstated as dependents.

The Veteran's appeals for service connection for right hip pain and left hip pain have been dismissed as he has withdrawn his appeal.

The Board denied reinstatement of the apportionment of the Veteran's VA disability compensation to the appellant on behalf of their children due to lack of evidence submitted during a period when such submissions were not allowed.

The Veteran's disability ratings for loss of use of the left foot and right hand were reduced, but the termination of benefits related to these disabilities is upheld.,Special Monthly Compensation, specially adapted housing benefits, automobile and adaptive equipment allowance, total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disability (TDIU), and Dependents' Educational Assistance eligibility were all terminated.

The Veteran's prescription medication for multiple myeloma was covered by VA, and the appeal is granted as it met the criteria for payment or reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses incurred at a non-VA facility due to an emergency condition.

The Veteran's prescription for Vancomycin was denied reimbursement under 38 U.S.C. § 1725 because it did not meet the criteria for emergency treatment in a hospital or similar facility.

The Veteran's claims for educational assistance benefits under Chapter 30 have been denied multiple times. The Board is remanded to review the previous administrative decisions and associate them with the record to determine eligibility.

The Board has granted service connection for residuals of strokes and entitlement to special monthly compensation (SMC) based on the need for aid and attendance due to the Veteran's stroke residuals.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to a need for additional development, specifically an examination to determine if the Veteran's service-connected disabilities require regular aid and attendance or render him housebound.

The Veteran's appeal involves multiple issues related to rippling muscle disease and a bilateral hand disorder. The Board has decided that the claims for higher ratings, effective dates prior to December 30, 2018, and TDIU are remanded.,Issues include increased ratings for rippling muscle disease of the right lower extremity, left lower extremity, and bilateral hands; a request for an earlier effective date for service connection of a bilateral hand disorder; and a claim for TDIU prior to December 30, 2018.

The Veteran's eligibility for an extension of Post-9/11 GI Bill (Chapter 33) education benefits expired on January 1, 2021. The Board denied the claim as none of the limited circumstances allowing for an extension are applicable.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal regarding the removal of dependents A. Elliott and S. Choice, which resulted in their dismissal.

The Board has granted service connection for bilateral dry eye syndrome, finding that the Veteran's current condition is due to his exposure to burn pit fumes during active duty in Southwest Asia.

The Board has remanded the claims of service connection for uterine and ovarian cancer due to a lack of consideration of relevant evidence in the July 2023 VA examination.

The appeal is dismissed as the claim for payment of non-VA medical care provided on May 2, 2019, has been resolved by administrative action.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to a lack of VA examination for the claimed foot disorder, and the need to determine its nature and etiology.