Other conditions Board decisions

The Veteran's left forearm radius impairment is rated at 20 percent, and his left arm supination/pronation impairment was previously rated at 10 percent prior to April 27, 2022. The claim for higher ratings has been denied as the evidence does not support a higher rating based on current symptoms.

The Veteran's claim for travel expenses to the San Francisco VA Medical Center between October 13, 2016, and December 2017 is granted. The appeal is also remanded for additional development regarding claims from September 2015 to September 2016.

The Board has granted service connection for squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue, finding that it is at least as likely as not related to the Veteran's in-service herbicide exposure during his service in Vietnam.

The Board denied the Veteran's request to revoke the apportionment of his VA disability compensation of $300 per month to his estranged spouse, K.H., due to lack of hardship and because his income exceeded his expenses.

The Veteran's claims for service connection have been dismissed due to their death. The Board has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of these appeals.

The Board has restored dependency benefits for dependent child M.K. based on the VA's improper termination of benefits due to a procedural error.

The Veteran's appeal for special monthly compensation (SMC) based on aid and attendance was dismissed as the claim has been fully adjudicated.

The Board has remanded the claim for service connection for a pain disability, including as secondary to service-connected disabilities due to potential toxic exposure from herbicide agents. A VA medical opinion is required to determine if the Veteran's pain disability is etiologically related to his conceded TERA (herbicide exposure).

The Board has decided that the AOJ did not consider all relevant evidence and must remand the case to obtain missing documents before making a decision on the claim for reimbursement of medical expenses incurred at a non-VA facility on December 15, 2019.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal for all issues related to unauthorized medical expenses incurred at a private facility by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Financial Services Center.

The Board has remanded the claim for bradycardia due to incomplete verification of all periods of active duty, including ADSW and ADOS. The AOJ needs to conduct further development to ensure all relevant service records are accounted for.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient medical opinion regarding the relationship between the Veteran's heart disability and service.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to a pre-decisional duty to assist error regarding the Veteran's bilateral eye disorder and tuberculosis.

The Board has determined that the eligibility decision for PCAFC benefits is legally inadequate and remanded to allow for a proper medical review.

The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma is denied because the earliest possible effective date is August 4, 2022, when VA received his Intent to File a Claim.

The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder to include adjustment disorder, finding that new evidence received after the prior denial supports a finding of service connection.

The Board has determined that the current matter must be remanded for the RO to obtain a full accounting demonstrating all months and days of educational assistance benefits used by the Veteran, as there are discrepancies in the available information regarding his use of VA educational assistance benefits.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient notice provided by the AOJ and incomplete evidence. The appellant seeks reimbursement for medical services provided on January 9, 2020, but the full community care records are not currently in the record.

The Board has determined that the decision regarding eligibility for PCAFC benefits was legally inadequate and there was a pre-decisional duty to assist error. The case is being remanded to provide proper notice under 38 U.S.C. § 5104 and obtain a legally adequate medical opinion from the CEAT.

The Veteran's eligibility for PCAFC benefits is being remanded due to inadequate notice in the initial determination, and the need for supervision, protection, or instruction must be evaluated under the correct statutory criteria.