Other conditions Board decisions

The veteran's application for enrollment in the VA healthcare system was denied because he is not eligible due to being in priority category 8 and his application being received after January 17, 2003.

The veteran's claim for VA educational assistance benefits under Chapter 30, Title 38, United States Code is denied as he did not meet the basic eligibility requirements due to his discharge being described as 'under honorable conditions' but not meeting the alternative requirement of placement on a retired list or reserve component.

The VA determined that the veteran's service-connected shrapnel wounds to his left thigh and foot do not warrant a rating in excess of 10 percent, as there is no evidence of muscle, tendon, bone, artery, nerve, or joint damage.

The veteran's service is not qualifying for VA pension benefits due to the nature of his service in USAFFE and RPA.

The case is being remanded for the appellant's representative to review the claims folder and submit a VA Form 646 on her behalf. The appellant needs to take no further action unless notified.

The veteran's application for enrollment in the VA health care system was denied due to his income exceeding the means test threshold and applying after January 17, 2003.

The veteran's application for enrollment in the VA health care system was denied as he is assigned to Priority Group 8 and did not have a service-connected disability or other special eligibility attributes.

The veteran's application for enrollment in the VA healthcare system was denied due to his nonservice-connected status and placement in priority category 8, as well as filing after January 17, 2003.

The veteran's claim for reimbursement of private medical expenses incurred on May 25, 2004, was denied because a VA facility in Danville, Illinois, was feasibly available to provide the same medical services.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including a VA examination to determine if the veteran's shaking of the left side of the body is related to his service.

The veteran's appeal for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities has been dismissed because the veteran died during the pendency of the appeal.

The Board found no evidence linking the veteran's death to his military service, and denied service connection for cause of death.

The Board found that the veteran's lymphoma, which caused his death in August 1992, was not incurred or aggravated by service. The cause of death listed on the death certificate was lymphoma.

The Board has remanded the case for further development of medical records and exposure history, including asbestos exposure before and after service. A medical opinion will be sought to determine if any gastrointestinal disorders or asbestos exposure during service contributed to the veteran's death.

The veteran's claim for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) was denied. The Board found that the veteran did not meet the schedular requirements for TDIU due to his service-connected disabilities, and there were no circumstances outside of his service-connected conditions that would justify a TDIU evaluation. Additionally, the claim for an earlier effective date for the 30 percent rating for residuals of a through and through shell fragment wound of the right forearm was denied as well.

The veteran withdrew his appeal, and the Board has dismissed the case.

The Board denied a rating greater than 50 percent for dysthymia from May 12, 1986 to November 2, 2001. A 70 percent disability rating was granted effective from November 2, 2001.

The Board dismissed the appeal due to the appellant's death, and no jurisdiction remains for adjudicating the merits of this claim.

The veteran seeks service connection for residuals of a cold injury, but the case is being remanded to obtain additional information and possibly conduct further medical examinations.

The veteran's claim for an increased disability rating for spondylolisthesis is being remanded due to the need for additional VA treatment records and clarification of representation.