Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has remanded the case due to a lack of authorization for sleep study records. The Veteran's claim for service connection for a left hip condition, including as secondary to his service-connected left foot disability, remains under review.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's private outpatient vascular surgeries with follow-up testing provided at BASS on August 27, 2018, September 12, 2018, and September 28, 2018 were not covered by VA due to a lack of prior authorization under 38 U.S.C. § 1703(a).

The Veteran died in March 2008 and his surviving spouse was entitled to VA death pension benefits. The Appellant, the daughter of the deceased Veteran and his now deceased spouse, filed a claim for reimbursement of medical expenses her mother incurred before her death. However, since there were no pending claims or unpaid benefits at the time of the surviving spouse's death, the Board denied entitlement to accrued benefits.

The Veteran's left eye uveitis is being remanded for further development, including obtaining additional medical records and scheduling a VA examination to assess the current severity of his condition.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient evidence regarding asbestos exposure during service and a need for a VA medical opinion.

The Veteran's right pectoral tear is rated at 40 percent effective August 3, 2016. The disability was previously rated as noncompensable prior to that date.

The Veteran's appeal for VR&E benefits under the provisions of 38 U.S.C. Chapter 31, Title 38 of the United States Code is remanded due to uncertainty regarding whether the Veteran’s private attorney has submitted additional argument or evidence in support of the claim.

The Veteran's claim for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) due to service-connected disabilities was denied because the Veteran failed to provide requested information and forms, leading to his abandonment of the claim.

The Board has remanded the case due to a need for additional notice regarding marriage requirements under VA regulations.

The Board denied service connection for a right hand injury, finding that the evidence did not support a link between the current disability and service.

The Veteran requested to withdraw his claim for payment or reimbursement of medical services received at Onslow Memorial Hospital on December 5, 2014. The Board dismissed the appeal as a result.

The Veteran's left chest costochondritis has been rated at 10 percent since April 1, 2016. The Board found that the condition does not meet or more nearly approximate the criteria for a higher rating.

The Board denied DIC benefits because the Appellant was not recognized as the Veteran's surviving spouse for VA benefits purposes due to a separation caused by her own infidelity, and not due to the Veteran's misconduct.

The appeal was dismissed due to the appellant's death.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical evidence regarding the relationship between the Veteran's current back pain and a nodule on her lower back, as well as any other disability related to service.

The Veteran's respiratory cancer is presumed to be due to herbicide agent exposure while serving in the Republic of Vietnam, and his service connection claim for this condition has been granted.

The Board granted an earlier effective date of March 1, 2010 for DIC benefits due to the appellant filing a claim within one year of her husband's death.

The Veteran was granted service connection for Tourette's syndrome with dystonia, finding that his pre-existing condition worsened during military service.

The Veteran's cause of death (cardiac arrest, septic shock, and empyema) is not service-connected. The appellant's income exceeds the maximum annual pension rate for a surviving spouse without dependents.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient notification of the appellant's substantive appeal to the Veteran. The matter will be readjudicated after providing the content of the appellant’s February 2019 substantive appeal and notice of his right to request a hearing.