Other conditions Board decisions

The Veteran's claim for service connection for residuals of shrapnel wounds to the left leg and buttocks is being remanded due to inadequate examination opinions. The examiner did not consider the Veteran's lay assertions regarding his in-service injury.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to determine if the Veteran was exposed to herbicides during service in Guam, which could potentially grant service connection for his cause of death. The claim will be remanded for this purpose.

The Veteran's appeal involves the reduction and termination of his nonservice-connected pension benefits, effective February 1, 2005, and January 1, 2007. The case is being remanded for further development to clarify the Veteran's income and net worth information.

The Board finds that the recoupment of disability severance pay through withholding of VA disability compensation benefits in the amount of $619.40 beginning on July 1, 2008 was proper.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including a new VA examination to assess the severity of his service-connected left index finger disability and any associated scarring.

The Veteran's appeal has been dismissed as he withdrew his appeal prior to the Board making a decision.

The Board has reopened the Veteran's claim for service connection for a left elbow disability due to new evidence showing current left elbow pain and conditions. The Board found that this condition is related to his military service.

The Board has decided to remand the case for additional development, including obtaining SSA records and updating VA treatment records.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for a videoconference hearing. The issue of service connection for injury to teeth #23, #24, and #25 for compensation purposes remains pending.

The appellant is not eligible for Dependents' Educational Assistance (DEA) benefits because her period of eligibility ended on her 26th birthday, and she did not meet the requirements to extend her eligibility.

The Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining medical records and a supplemental opinion from a VA examiner.

The Board denied the Veteran's request for a waiver of recovery of an advance payment of educational assistance benefits in the amount of $3,000.00 due to fault on both the part of the Veteran and VA.

The Veteran's income for 2007 exceeded the specified threshold, resulting in a denial of treatment in VA healthcare system without copay requirement for the period from June 23, 2008 to June 22, 2009.

The Veteran is seeking compensation under the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. � 1151 for additional disability to his left foot, which he claims resulted from a bunionectomy performed at a VA medical facility in November 2009. The Board has determined that further development is needed and remands the case.

The Board dismissed the motion for revision of a June 2010 decision denying retroactive DEA benefits, as the Court had already affirmed that decision.

The Board has remanded the case due to procedural issues and the need for additional development, including notifying the appellant of potential exceptions that could extend her eligibility period beyond July 31, 2010.

The Board has ordered a remand due to the need for an addendum medical opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's Raynaud's syndrome. The case will be returned to the AOJ for further consideration.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded to obtain additional medical records and to schedule him for a VA examination. The issue at hand is whether the Veteran should be compensated under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 due to improper care received from VA for his broken finger.

The Veteran's claim for educational assistance in excess of one month and five days under the Post-9/11 GI Bill is denied as he has already used up his entitlement.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for VA benefits due to a lack of service in the Armed Forces of the United States, and thus, he did not meet the legal requirements for eligibility.