Back / lumbar spine decisions — 2001

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for his TDIU due to a service-connected back disability, finding that there was no evidence of an increase in disability within one year prior to the filing of the claim.

The Board is remanding the case for further adjudication due to new evidence and procedural issues.

The Board denied the claim of service connection for degenerative disc disease of the lumbosacral spine, finding that there was no evidence linking it to service.

The Board finds that the veteran's low back disability, which resulted from a VA procedure in July 1987, caused additional disabilities of his right leg, foot, and left upper leg. The decision grants compensation for these disabilities.

The Board has granted a disability rating of 30 percent for postoperative residuals of a right ankle fracture with ankylosis, effective from the date of the claim. The left ankle disability is rated at 10 percent prior to September 27, 1999 and 20 percent as of December 1, 2000.

The veteran's claims for increased and total disability ratings were denied as the veteran failed to report for scheduled VA examinations, which would have provided necessary evidence to support his claims.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim of service connection for postoperative residuals of a lumbar laminectomy and remanded it for further development, including obtaining medical records and an examination to determine if his current back disorder is related to military service.

The Board finds that the veteran's currently diagnosed chronic cervical strain, muscle spasm, and degenerative disc disease of C5-C6 are etiologically related to service. The residuals of head injury are not currently demonstrated.

The Board determined that the veteran's disability rating for lumbosacral spine arthritis was reduced from 40 percent to 20 percent, effective October 1, 2000. The reduction was based on the opinion of a VA examiner who concluded that most of the veteran's symptoms were due to underlying conditions unrelated to service.

The Board found no evidence of a current disability of the back, right leg, or left leg that was incurred in service. The veteran's arthritis was not shown to be related to his military service.

The Board has granted an increased rating of 20 percent for the veteran's service-connected low back disability, effective from August 1999. The veteran continues to experience significant pain and functional limitations.

The Board denied service connection for a right knee condition and low back strain, but granted an increased evaluation of 30% for the veteran's left leg disability prior to March 28, 2001.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim for service connection for a low back disorder due to new and material evidence. The case is now remanded for further development, including obtaining medical records and scheduling a VA examination.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the claim for service connection for a low back disability. The veteran's current low back condition is found to be related to an injury in service, and thus service connection is granted.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claims for service connection for a left forearm scar and arthritis of the lumbosacral spine (claimed as a low back condition) must be remanded due to inadequate notice, incomplete application, and need for additional development.

The Board has determined that the claims for service connection are not well grounded and requires additional development to determine if there is evidence of a current disability related to military service.

The Board found no evidence of a relationship between the veteran's current disabilities and his active service, including hearing loss, back disorder, skin rash, migraine headaches, haziness and forgetfulness with blurred vision, fatigue, and nerve condition. The claims were denied.

The Board has dismissed the appeal due to the veteran's death.

The Board is remanding the case due to a change in law brought about by the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000, requiring additional notification and development action.

The appeal is being remanded for additional development and consideration of the veteran's claims, including obtaining a complete rationale from VA examiners and recent treatment records.