Other conditions Board decisions

The Board found that the criteria for payment or reimbursement of unauthorized, non-VA medical expenses incurred at Manatee Memorial Hospital from January 5 to January 7, 2009 were not met as VA's determination was based on the Veteran's stable condition and ability to be transferred to a VA facility.

The Board has denied the appellant's claims of legal entitlement to VA disability benefits and for one-time payment from the FVECF due to a lack of qualifying service. The service department certified that the appellant did not have the requisite military service to establish eligibility.

The Board determined that the Veteran's pension benefits were terminated due to excessive income and denied his request for restoration of Section 306 disability pension benefits on or after January 1, 1979. The effective date for improved pension benefits was established as January 1, 1979.

The Board has determined that additional development of the evidence is required in order to make a determination on the Veteran's claim for service connection for residuals of a back injury with degenerative joint disease.

The Veteran's unauthorized medical expenses incurred from January 23-25, 2010 at Shands Hospital in Jacksonville were denied as he did not meet the criteria for reimbursement under VA regulations due to his lack of service-connected disabilities and the nature of his condition.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development of his medical records and an appropriate VA examination to assess the impact of his service-connected disabilities on his employability.

The Veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of ambulance expenses incurred on October 16, 2010 is being remanded due to the VAMC failing to apply the correct laws and regulations governing this claim.

The Veteran's peptic ulcer disease with Barrett's esophagus is currently rated at 20 percent, but the Board found that it does not meet the criteria for a higher rating based on moderate or moderately severe symptoms.

The evidence does not show a current disability of the left elbow, and there is no medical nexus linking any diagnosed condition to service.

The Board denied the claim, finding that Graves' disease was not incurred in or aggravated by service and may not be presumed to have been so incurred.

The RO reduced the Veteran's heart valve disability rating from 100% to 60%, effective November 1, 2008. The reduction was proper as it followed applicable procedures and there had been sustained improvement in the severity of the condition.

The Veteran's service-connected duodenal ulcer with gastritis is manifested by recurrent incapacitating episodes averaging ten days or more in duration at least four or more times a year, warranting a 40 percent disability rating.

The Veteran's residuals of a pelvic fracture with left hip pain are currently rated at 10 percent, and the Board finds that this rating is appropriate given his current range of motion.

The Board has determined that the appellant's discharge from service was under other than honorable conditions due to willful acceptance of an undesirable discharge and willful and persistent misconduct. As a result, his character of discharge is considered a bar to VA benefits.

The Veteran's left leg disorder is presumed to have existed prior to service, and the Board finds that it was not aggravated by military service. The case is remanded for further examination and development.

The Board has remanded the case due to a scheduling error for a Travel Board hearing. The Veteran's claim of reopening his defective vision service connection is still pending and will be addressed after the hearing.

The Veteran's post-operative neuritis, sural nerve, left foot is characterized by pain and decreased sensation on the lateral side of the left foot. The Board finds that a 10 percent evaluation is appropriate.

The Board has granted the Veteran's claim of service connection for bilateral pes cavus, hallux valgus, and other foot deformities, to include as secondary to service connected tinea pedis. The new evidence received since the July 1994 RO rating decision is considered material and sufficient to reopen the claim.

The Board found that there is no evidence to support the Veteran's claim of additional disability due to VA care, and thus denied his claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151.

The Board has determined that the appellant does not have service as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army, including the recognized guerrillas, in the service of the United States Armed Forces. Therefore, they do not meet the basic eligibility requirements for VA benefits and their claim is denied.