Other conditions Board decisions

The Veteran was treated at a private facility on an emergency basis and VA facilities were not feasibly available. The criteria for payment or reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses have been met, allowing the Veteran to be reimbursed for the medical bills incurred on December 22, 2010.

The Veteran's treatment at Shands Health Care, University of Florida on November 2, 2011 was not authorized by VA and did not meet the criteria for emergency medical care. The Board found that the treatment was not emergent in nature and that a reasonable person would have expected delay to be safe.

The Veteran's death occurred before the eligibility criteria for a government-furnished medallion were established, thus denying the claim.

The Board has determined that the VAMC did not apply the correct laws and regulations to the appellant's claim for payment or reimbursement of ambulance expenses incurred on August 28, 2009. The case is being remanded to allow the VAMC to consider the applicable provisions including those under 38 U.S.C.A. � 1725 and 38 C.F.R. � 17.120.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's preexisting right eye pterygium did not worsen during service, and thus he is not entitled to service connection for residuals of right eye pterygium. The left eye pterygium was unrelated to service, and there is no evidence of an undiagnosed illness related to Southwest Asia service for his bilateral knee pain.

The Board found that there is no causal association between the Veteran's current bilateral foot disorder and his active military service. The VA examiner concluded that the medical evidence did not support the Veteran's current bilateral foot disorder being caused by, a result of, or aggravated by the foot swelling in service.

The Board dismissed the appeal due to the Veteran's death, as it has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of this claim.

The Veteran has withdrawn his appeal for an increased rating for hiatal hernia.

The Board denied the appellant's application for basic eligibility for VA benefits due to her spouse not having qualifying service, rendering her ineligible for these benefits.

The Board found that the Veteran's bilateral hand condition is not linked to his service and denied his claim for service connection.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including a VA examination to determine if the Veteran's current knee disability is related to in-service findings. The claim will be reconsidered after this additional development.

The Veteran's bilateral hip disabilities have been rated at 20 percent each since October 12, 2004. The VA has granted increased ratings for the service-connected left and right hip disabilities.

The Board has determined that currently diagnosed hidradenitis is not related to service, including as due to Agent Orange exposure. The claim for service connection for hidradenitis of the groin is denied.

The Veteran's lower left extremity impairment is due to his service-connected radiculopathy, and there is no current diagnosis of a neurologic disability other than radiculopathy.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for a stomach condition as secondary to post-operative residuals, epigastric/umbilical hernia repair is being remanded due to the need for further evidentiary development.

The Veteran's appeal for an increased disability rating for her herniated nucleus pulposus, status post discectomy L5-S1 was withdrawn prior to the Board's decision.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for shin splints and residuals of a back injury, finding no current diagnosis of either condition. The Board also found that there was insufficient evidence to establish a link between any current disability and service.

The Veteran's claim for a compensable rating for his fracture of maxilla, left zygomatic arch prior to December 4, 2009 and a rating in excess of 10 percent from that date is being remanded due to the need for additional medical evidence.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for thyroglossal duct cyst and vocal cord hyperkeratosis are being remanded due to the need for additional medical opinions regarding their etiology.

The Board has reopened the appellant's claim and granted it on de novo review, finding that his discharge was not dishonorable and is not a bar to VA benefits (other than medical treatment).