Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has ordered additional development to address the validity of an overpayment created in the amount of $16,055.50 due to a retroactive termination of VA benefits for being identified as a fugitive felon.

The claim for a one-time payment from the FVEC fund is denied because the decedent died prior to the enactment of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, which established this benefit.

The Veteran's grandson, who was not legally adopted by the Veteran and his spouse, does not meet the eligibility requirements for Chapter 35 Dependents' Educational Assistance Program benefits.

The Board has determined that the appellant does not have qualifying service to be eligible for the one-time payment from the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund.

The appellant is not recognized as the Veteran's surviving spouse for VA death benefits due to a prior divorce, and thus her claim is denied.

The Board found that the Appellant did not have an acute myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, or cerebrovascular accident during inactive duty for training (IADT), and his atrial fibrillation is not related to active military service. The respiratory disorder had resolved with treatment in service and has not been continuous since separation.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for increased ratings for his left and right Achilles tendonitis, finding that the evidence did not warrant a rating higher than 10 percent.

The Board found that the Veteran did not properly complete a VA Form 22-1990, which was submitted in April 2010, and thus it does not constitute an irrevocable election of Chapter 33 Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits. As a result, the appeal is denied.

The Board found that the August 2010 notice of disagreement was not timely filed, and therefore denied the appeal.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for eligibility to VA educational assistance benefits under Chapter 1606, Title 10, United States Code (MGIB-SR) due to his unsatisfactory participation in the Selected Reserve.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate VA examination and failure to comply with previous remand directives. The Veteran needs a new VA examination to determine if his current hip disorders are related to service-connected conditions.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining additional medical opinions and records. The Veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for a bilateral hip disorder is related to his lumbar spine disability, but the examiner's opinion is inadequate. His TDIU claim may be impacted by the outcome of this determination.

The Board found that the Veteran's post-surgical infection did not result in additional disability and that VA was not at fault. The claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 was denied.

The VA examiner found no evidence that the Veteran's current psychogenic neurological disorder was caused by the October 2000 surgery, including anesthesia and medications used during the procedure. The preponderance of evidence does not support a finding of additional disability.

The Board has determined that there is no evidence to support the Veteran's claims for service connection for Acute Myelocytic Leukemia and Granulocytic Sarcoma, as these conditions are not shown to be related to his military service or any incidents therein.

The Board found no current disability related to the Veteran's claimed ear and sinus disabilities, and denied service connection for these conditions.

The Board has granted service connection for a skin disorder of the groin area, for accrued benefits purposes only, based on credible and consistent statements from the Veteran indicating that his skin disorder began during military service and persisted since then.

The Veteran's prostate disorder, diagnosed as benign prostatic hypertrophy, is not service connected due to lack of a link between his current condition and his military service. The Board also found no evidence linking the condition to his documented radiation exposure.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's service-connected subtotal gastric resection did not contribute to his cause of death, which was attributed to probable atherosclerotic vascular disease (ASCVD).

The Board found that the appellant's skin disorder did not have its clinical onset in service and is not otherwise related to active duty, including as being secondary to dioxin exposure.