Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has granted an earlier effective date of July 28, 2004 for the award of service connection for urinary incontinence. The Veteran's claim for a higher initial rating for urinary incontinence from September 14, 2018 to June 25, 2019 was denied as his disability is already at its maximum schedular evaluation (60%). A TDIU based on urinary incontinence alone and SMC at the housebound rate were granted for this period.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for hepatocellular carcinoma, due to Agent Orange exposure, is dismissed because the Veteran died during the appeal process.

Your claim for payment of the cost of non-VA emergency medical services provided on November 18, 2018 has been resolved by administrative action. The appeal is dismissed as your request was granted.

Your claim for payment of medical services provided on June 23, 2018 has been resolved by administrative action and is now approved. The appeal is dismissed as moot.

The Board has granted a 20 percent apportionment of the Veteran's VA compensation benefits to the appellant on behalf of their minor child, M.M., and also granted an apportionment of the full amount of VA compensation benefits not paid to the Veteran during his period of incarceration on behalf of M.M.

The Board has remanded the case due to new and relevant evidence received in conjunction with a supplemental claim for service connection of a skin disability. The Veteran's exposure to Agent Orange is conceded, but further examination is needed to determine if his current skin condition is related to his active service.

The Board denied a higher rate for survivor special monthly pension (SMP) benefits, finding that the appellant's SMP rate has been calculated correctly throughout the appeal period and excluding the $486 per month payment to a pooled trust as an unreimbursed medical expense was proper.

The Board denied service connection for pancreas cancer, finding that the evidence did not support a link to Agent Orange exposure and instead supported a direct relationship with the Veteran's condition.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma is remanded due to outstanding service treatment records and the need for a VA examination.

The Board has remanded the case due to concerns about VA care and treatment of a surgical site infection, which may have contributed to the Veteran's abnormal gait.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal for a total disability evaluation based on individual unemployability (TDIU) as he is already receiving a 100% rating.

The Board has determined that the removal of the Appellant as the Veteran's fiduciary was not properly conducted and is remanding the case for further action.

The Veteran requested to withdraw his appeal for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU). As a result, the appeal is dismissed.

The Veteran's claim for payment of expenses for non-VA medical treatment from June 1, 2020 to June 3, 2020 has been approved and is dismissed as moot.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to a failure of VA's duty to notify and assist in creating an overpayment debt. The Appellant must be notified of the reasons for the creation of the debt, her rights to request a waiver or appeal, and any additional evidence needed.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to a failure of VA's duty to notify and assist the Appellant in her claim for overpayment of VA pension benefits. The issues are whether the overpayment was properly created and if a waiver is needed.

The Veteran's disability rating for chronic right elbow strain based on supination and pronation has been restored to 20 percent effective June 1, 2020. The issues of entitlement to increased ratings for right elbow extension and flexion remain under review.

The Veteran's overpayment debt was created due to continued receipt of benefits after her divorce, and the AOJ failed to provide sufficient notice regarding the reasons for the debt. The decision is remanded to correct this pre-decisional duty to assist error.

The AOJ rejected the Veteran's request for a Higher-Level Review of their decision on reimbursement for non-VA ambulance services. The matter is being remanded to issue a new rating decision.

The Board has determined that the reduction of the disability rating for heart valve replacement surgery from 100 percent to 60 percent was not proper and is void ab initio, as there is no evidence of improvement in the Veteran's condition.