Other conditions Board decisions

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development, including a VA examination to determine the etiology of his bilateral foot disabilities.

The Board has remanded the case due to the Veteran requesting a hearing, and the appeal is now scheduled for a travel board hearing.

The Veteran's initial ratings for his service-connected left hip disability and low back disability were denied. The Board found that the evidence did not support higher ratings at any point.

The Board has determined that Health Care District of Palm Beach County submitted a timely claim for payment of unauthorized emergency medical transportation provided to the Veteran on September 10, 2009.

The Veteran's claim for reimbursement of medical expenses is denied because the treatment provided was not rendered in a medical emergency and did not meet the criteria for emergency treatment under VA regulations.

The Veteran's claim is being remanded for additional development, including a new VA examination and the provision of outstanding medical records. The appeal will be reconsidered after these actions.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for a new VA examination to address whether his current right leg condition, including meralgia paresthetica and neuralgia paresthetica, was caused by or permanently worsened beyond natural progression by his service-connected left knee disability.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's death occurred prior to November 1, 1990 and therefore does not meet the criteria for a Government-furnished headstone or grave marker.

The Board found that the appellant's preexisting heart murmur did not increase in severity during her period of active duty for training (ACDUTRA), and thus denied service connection.

The Board has determined that additional development is necessary prior to adjudication of the Veteran's claim for service connection for a left leg disorder, including blood clots and varicosities. The case is REMANDED to obtain VA treatment records, schedule the Veteran for a vascular examination, and then re-adjudicate the claim.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not currently suffer from a disability of the middle toe on his right foot, and thus service connection is denied.

The Board has granted a separate 10 percent evaluation for the service-connected Frey's syndrome, finding that it should be rated under Diagnostic Code 8205.

The Board has remanded the case due to a need for an addendum opinion from a VA counseling psychologist or VRC regarding whether the Veteran had an employment handicap during his period of work as a U.S. Navy lab technician.

The Board found that a lung disability did not begin during the Veteran's active duty for training and was not aggravated by his military service. The evidence does not support a finding of aggravation, and there is no clear and unmistakable evidence to rebut the presumption of soundness.

The Veteran's hydronephrosis is currently rated at 30 percent, which is the maximum rating available under Diagnostic Code 7509. The Board found that a higher rating was not warranted as there were no manifestations of renal dysfunction or hypertension.

The Board found that the Veteran's lumbar spine disorder, diagnosed as spondylosis and a herniation of the L5-S1 disc, was not incurred in or aggravated by service and is not related to service. Therefore, service connection for this condition was denied.

The Board denied the Veteran's request for waiver of recovery of an overpayment of Department of Veterans Affairs disability compensation in the amount of $7,251.33 as it was not timely received.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development to clarify the nature and etiology of his toe and foot disorders, as well as to obtain a new VA examination to determine the current severity of his service-connected left nephrectomy with normal right kidney with scar.

The appeal has been dismissed as the appellant's representative withdrew all claims and appeals before VA.

The Board found that the overpayment of $5,560 was valid and properly created. The Veteran's failure to report his SSA income led to the creation of this debt. However, there is no statutory bar to waiver of recovery due to lack of bad faith on the part of the Veteran.