Other conditions Board decisions

The Board dismissed the appeal as the claim for payment of non-VA medical care provided by XRA on December 2, 2019 was resolved in favor of the appellant after VHA overturned its initial denial and approved the care.

The Board dismissed the appeal because the claim was administratively reviewed and approved for payment by TriWest, overturning the original denial.

The Board has determined that the decision on appeal regarding eligibility for PCAFC benefits is legally inadequate and remands the case to ensure proper notice and a new medical opinion.

The appellant withdrew his appeal regarding the award of attorney fees to him and S. Shelton, arising from an April 2021 rating decision.

The Board dismissed the appeal as there is no longer a case or controversy for decision due to VHA overturning its initial denial and approving the non-VA medical care provided by STAR on April 7, 2023.

The appeal is dismissed because the VCCP process does not allow for Board review of payment decisions.

The Veteran's right leg condition, specifically his osteomyelitis, is currently rated at 30 percent. The Board has determined that the VA examination conducted in October 2023 was inadequate and must be remanded for an adequate opinion to address the Veteran's claims he is entitled to a rating for osteomyelitis instead of limitation of extension of the right leg.

The Board denied the Veteran's request for a waiver of recovery of an overpayment of $880.03 due to financial hardship, but found that the Veteran was at fault in creating the debt and received concurrent military drill pay and VA compensation benefits.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's left hip strain is secondary to his service-connected bilateral knee disability, and thus grants entitlement to service connection for this condition.

The Board dismissed the appeal because the issue of payment for dental care services provided by a non-VA provider under a Veterans Care Agreement is subject to specific administrative dispute resolution procedures that do not allow for further review.

The Board denied service connection for hepatic steatosis, finding that the Veteran's exposure to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune did not cause his current condition and that there was no in-service injury or disease related to hepatic steatosis.

The Veteran's tremors in the left and right upper and lower extremities are remanded due to a duty to assist error. The Board will consider whether these conditions are related to service, including exposure to herbicide agents.

The Veteran's ventral hernia is found to be related to their service-connected low back disability, and thus service connection for the condition as secondary to the service-connected disability is granted.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for a right eye disability and a sleep disturbance disability, finding no current disabilities in these areas. The Board also found that any sleep disturbance is part of his already service-connected generalized anxiety disorder.

The appeal is dismissed because the claim for payment of non-VA medical services provided on July 11, 2020, was administratively approved and the appellant was reimbursed in full.

The Board has dismissed the appeal as there is no longer a case or controversy for decision due to VHA overturning its initial denial and approving the non-VA medical care provided by CFS from April 2, 2020, to April 30, 2020.

The Board found that the termination of the Veteran's nonservice-connected pension benefits was improper due to a lack of proper procedural steps, including the failure to provide a predetermination hearing. The decision reinstates the Veteran's nonservice-connected pension benefits effective September 1, 2017.

The Veteran's death was not service-connected, and the Appellant did not meet the criteria for nonservice-connected burial benefits. The claim is denied.

The Board has decided that the eligibility for benefits under the Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers (PCAFC) is remanded due to a pre-decisional error in interpreting the 'need for supervision, protection, or instruction' as defined by VA regulations. The case will be reviewed with the correct statutory criteria.

The Board has remanded the claim due to insufficient evidence regarding the validity of the debt, including how many credit hours the Veteran was enrolled in and notification provided. Additional documentation is needed.