Other conditions Board decisions

The Veteran's left hip bursitis tenosynovitis was rated at 10 percent for painful motion and limitation of flexion, but denied for limitations in extension and abduction/adduction/rotation. The Board found no evidence to support higher ratings.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to missing records and incomplete notice, requiring further action by the AOJ.

The Board dismissed the appeal for retroactive DIC benefits as the appellant did not timely file a VA Form 10182 and good cause was not presented to accept her late filing.

The Veteran's current diagnosis of testicular torsion affecting the left testis is found to be related to service, and his claim for service connection is granted.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities do not meet the criteria for an employment handicap, and therefore he is not entitled to VR&E benefits.

The Board has determined that the appeal is moot as the administrative action approving payment for non-VA ambulance transport provided on May 24, 2024, constitutes a reversal of the denial and grants the benefit sought.

The Veteran's claim for a compensable rating for residuals of right tonsil cancer is denied as the evidence does not support the presence of stricture or obstruction of pharynx, absence of soft palate secondary to trauma, chemical burn, or granulomatous disease, or paralysis of soft palate with swallowing difficulty (nasal regurgitation) and speech impairment.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims due to incomplete records and unclear etiology of his essential tremors. The Veteran contends that his exposure to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune caused his condition, but the VA does not have all of his private treatment records or a clear opinion on the matter.

The Veteran's pneumothorax (collapsed lung and reduced capacity) following a VA biopsy was not caused by any fault on the part of VA, and thus compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 is denied.

The Board has determined that further action is needed to determine the Veteran's net worth and countable income for pension benefits, as his SSA benefits include Supplemental Security Income (SSI). The Veteran needs clarification on his household expenses and income.

The Board has remanded the case due to a duty to assist error that occurred prior to the May 2024 decision on appeal. The AOJ needs to verify the appellant's active duty military service and obtain relevant records from potential repositories, including the U.S. Army Human Resources Command.

The Board denied the Veteran's request for an extension of his delimiting date for Post-9/11 GI Bill (Chapter 33) educational assistance benefits, finding no evidence that prevented him from initiating or completing his chosen program of education.

The Veteran's eligibility for higher level PCAFC benefits is being remanded due to inadequate notification and a pre-decisional duty to assist error. The Board will consider the evidence of record, including recent correspondence from the Caregiver, and obtain a legally adequate medical decision.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to a need for further review of the character of discharge determination, including obtaining a medical opinion regarding the Appellant's mental state at the time of his misconduct and issuing a new character of discharge determination under revised VA regulations.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate medical opinions and a need for clarification of the legal standard regarding secondary service connection.

The Veteran's disability rating for residual(s) of left lower extremity weakness is denied as it does not meet the criteria for a higher rating.

The Board dismissed the appeal as the appellant's claim for payment of non-VA medical services provided to their deceased relative has been granted by VA's Office of Community Care.

Your appeal for service connection of a hold in left lung has been dismissed due to the death of the appellant during the pendency of your appeal.

The Veteran's service in the United States Army Reserves for at least six years, including active duty for training, qualifies her for VA loan guaranty benefits.

The Veteran's appeal regarding his eligibility for the Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers (PCAFC) was dismissed as there has been no decision by VA with respect to his continued enrollment in the program.