Other conditions Board decisions

The veteran's service is not considered to be during a period of war, thus he does not meet the legal requirement for basic eligibility for nonservice-connected pension benefits.

The appellant is not eligible for DIC benefits as an adult helpless child of the veteran due to his legal marriage since May 1981.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including scheduling a VA examination and obtaining medical records.

The Board granted service connection for Acute Myelogenous Leukemia (AML) due to presumed exposure to herbicide agents, including Agent Orange. The other issues were remanded.

The Board has determined that the veteran's emergency medical services at Northbay Medical Center on August 24, 2006 were covered by VA and granted payment or reimbursement for these expenses.

The Board denied the appellant's claim for restoration of VA non-service-connected death pension benefits due to insufficient information provided regarding her income and expenses, particularly after her son turned 18 in August 2004. The claim is therefore denied as there is not enough evidence to determine if she would be entitled to benefits from that date.

The Board has remanded the case to the RO for further adjudication due to a need for additional development, including obtaining medical records and scheduling a VA examination.

The Board denied service connection for bilateral optic atrophy and compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for hepatitis C due to VA medical treatment, finding that the veteran was not on active military service during the incident.

The veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD is being remanded due to the need for a VA examination to verify stressors and determine if they are related to his current condition.

The Board has granted service connection for lumbosacral strain, finding that the veteran's current back condition is related to his military service. However, service connection was denied for throat pain as it has not been medically linked to service.

The VA has determined that the veteran's service-connected right upper and lower extremity disabilities do not warrant an evaluation in excess of 10 percent.

The Board dismissed the veteran's appeal for payment or reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses due to his failure to provide requested evidence within one year.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for rectal prolapse and partial gastrectomy from duodenal ulcer disease as secondary to his service-connected residuals of a fracture of the left malar bone. The evidence did not show current diagnoses or a link between these conditions and his service-connected disability.

The Board has ordered a remand to obtain additional medical opinions and records in order to determine the cause of the veteran's death and whether it was related to his service.

The Board has determined that the veteran's residuals of a fracture of the right fifth metacarpal and degenerative joint disease of the right hand are related to service, thus granting these claims.

The veteran's claim for restoration of nonservice-connected disability pension was denied as his Philippine Scout service did not qualify him for pension benefits.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim for service connection due to new and material evidence, but the claim is still denied as there is no established link between his current skin cancer and his military service.

The Board has reopened the veteran's previously denied claim of service connection for ulcerative colitis and finds that it is more likely than not that the condition first manifested during his active military service. The Board grants service connection for ulcerative colitis.

The Board denied the appellant's claims for service connection for residuals of a cesarean section, hysterectomy, and lysis of adhesions due to an old appendectomy. The appeals were based on direct evidence rather than reopening previously denied claims.

The VA Network Authorization Office in Canandaigua, New York has remanded the case for further development due to lack of documentation of medical costs and services provided.