Other conditions Board decisions

The Veteran's parents were removed from his VA disability benefits award effective March 30, 2018. The appeal for an earlier effective date is dismissed as the decision became final.

The Board has remanded the case for further development to determine the correct date of incarceration and whether the reduction of compensation benefits in November and December 1997 was proper.

The Board found that the Veteran's income exceeded the maximum annual pension rate, leading to termination of his nonservice-connected pension benefits. The claim is denied.

The Veteran's claims for initial compensable ratings for bilateral eye optic drusen, pseudopapilledema, and papilledema, including on an extraschedular basis, as well as his right ankle strain claim have been denied. The Board found that the evidence did not support assigning a higher rating due to consistent visual acuity of 20/40 or better throughout the appeal period.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient medical opinions regarding the Veteran's claimed right ear conditions. The Veteran seeks service connection for residuals of a right ear infection, chronic otitis media, and chronic eustachian tube dysfunction.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for updated VA treatment records and a new medical opinion considering the total potential exposure through all applicable military deployments of the Veteran, including the synergistic, combined effect of all toxic exposure risk activities.

The Board denied the extension of the delimiting date for Dependents' Educational Assistance (DEA) benefits, finding that an additional extension beyond December 20, 2012, was not warranted due to lack of interruption or suspension of education and no order to active duty.

The Board dismissed the claim for apportionment of the Veteran's VA disability compensation benefits to the Appellant on behalf of his stepchildren, J.K., C.K., and C.K. as they were removed from the Veteran's award effective January 1, 2018.

The Veteran's pituitary gland disorder with hypopituitarism is rated at a maximum of 60 percent effective November 28, 2008.

The Veteran's claim for a disability rating in excess of 30 percent for unspecified trauma and stressor related disorder prior to September 11, 2023 was denied. The Board found that the symptoms did not warrant a higher rating.,The Veteran's claim for a disability rating in excess of 70 percent for unspecified trauma and stressor related disorder from September 12, 2023 was also denied. The Board concluded that the symptoms did not meet the criteria for a 100% rating.

The Veteran's representative requested to withdraw the claim for a disability rating in excess of 10 percent for chondromalacia patella of the left knee, and the Board has dismissed the appeal as a result.

The Veteran's gastrointestinal disability, manifested by nausea, dizziness and epigastric distress, is rated at 40 percent. The appeal for a higher rating has been denied.

The Board denied an effective date prior to September 25, 2018 for additional dependency compensation for the Veteran's spouse due to lack of proper notification.

The Veteran's claims for service connection have been denied. The Board found that the evidence did not raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claims.

The Board has remanded the case due to deficiencies in the August 2023 VA opinion and because of potential exposure at Naval Air Station Alameda. The Veteran's claim for service connection for breast cancer will be reconsidered with a new TERA memorandum and an addendum etiology opinion.

The Veteran's request for a waiver of recovery of the overpayment of VA pension benefits in the amount of $2,787.20 was deemed timely filed and granted.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for a VA medical opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's prostate disorder, including any herbicide exposure. Additionally, a toxic exposure risk activity (TERA) opinion is needed.

The Board denied service connection for progressive supranuclear palsy, finding that the evidence did not support a link to active service or herbicide exposure.

The Board has determined that the overpayment was not due to concurrent military retirement pay and compensation, but rather a mix-up in updating the Veteran's profile. The Veteran contends that VA should have notified him of his current spouse A.K., who was incorrectly listed as his dependent spouse. The case is being remanded for further review.

The Veteran is seeking the recoupment of education benefits used under Chapter 1606, which he has since repaid. The Board notes that combining all previously used education entitlements (Chapter 32 and Chapter 1606) leaves the Veteran with 11 months and 12 days of education benefits available to be used under Chapter 33. A remand is required for verification of any overpayment created from use of Chapter 1606 benefits.